IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i3p1392-d489215.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stakeholder Value Creation: Comparing ESG and Value Added in European Companies

Author

Listed:
  • Silvana Signori

    (Department of Management, University of Bergamo, 24127 Bergamo, Italy)

  • Leire San-Jose

    (Financial Economic II Department, University of the Basque Country, UPV/EHU, 48015 Bilbao, Spain)

  • Jose Luis Retolaza

    (Deusto Business School, University of Deusto, 48014 Bilbao, Spain)

  • Gianfranco Rusconi

    (Department of Law, University of Bergamo, 24127 Bergamo, Italy)

Abstract

In recent years, a renewed interest in value creation for stakeholders has been witnessed in different contexts. Different tools have been proposed to try to grasp and measure such value(s) but, in many cases, the main perspective remains that of the shareholders. To contribute to the field of research that aims to discuss novel ways of thinking about value creation measurement, this paper addresses the relationship between ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) ratings and Value Added, as proxies of value creation and distribution for stakeholders. In particular, we consider whether ESG ratings are able to capture companies that are characterized by their capacity for generating higher Value Added for stakeholders. Our analysis uses the frontier methodology combined with means comparison. Data from 2018 were downloaded from EIKON, for all companies within the Euro zone and for all sectors (1932 companies, of which 399 held an ESG rating, compared with 1533 without ESG analysis). Our analysis reveals that, although ESG is theoretically considered a good social responsibility proxy, ESG indices cannot be used as an indicator of value creation for stakeholders but, rather, must be considered as only one of the components. This implies a need to review the limitations of ESG ratings and establish that the relevant indices are not suitable for use in universal or absolute decision-making.

Suggested Citation

  • Silvana Signori & Leire San-Jose & Jose Luis Retolaza & Gianfranco Rusconi, 2021. "Stakeholder Value Creation: Comparing ESG and Value Added in European Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-16, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:3:p:1392-:d:489215
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/3/1392/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/3/1392/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Witold J. Henisz & Sinziana Dorobantu & Lite J. Nartey, 2014. "Spinning gold: The financial returns to stakeholder engagement," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(12), pages 1727-1748, December.
    2. Carol A. Adams, 2017. "Conceptualising the contemporary corporate value creation process," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 30(4), pages 906-931, May.
    3. Panayiotis G. Curtis & Michael Hanias & Eleftherios Kourtis & Mixalis Kourtis, 2020. "Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) and Financial Ratios: Α Pro-Stakeholders’ View of Performance Measurement for Sustainable Value Creation of the Wind Energy," International Journal of Economics & Business Administration (IJEBA), International Journal of Economics & Business Administration (IJEBA), vol. 0(2), pages 326-350.
    4. Barreiros, Lídia., 1985. "Towards social accounting," ILO Working Papers 992431063402676, International Labour Organization.
    5. Michael C. Jensen, 2010. "Value Maximization, Stakeholder Theory, and the Corporate Objective Function," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 22(1), pages 32-42, January.
    6. Constantin Belu, 2009. "Ranking corporations based on sustainable and socially responsible practices. A data envelopment analysis (DEA) approach," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(4), pages 257-268.
    7. Gunnar Friede & Timo Busch & Alexander Bassen, 2015. "ESG and financial performance: aggregated evidence from more than 2000 empirical studies," Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(4), pages 210-233, October.
    8. Axel Haller & Chris J. van Staden & Cristina Landis, 2018. "Value Added as part of Sustainability Reporting: Reporting on Distributional Fairness or Obfuscation?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 152(3), pages 763-781, October.
    9. Jaepil Choi & Heli Wang, 2009. "Stakeholder relations and the persistence of corporate financial performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(8), pages 895-907, August.
    10. Shih‐Fang Lo, 2010. "Performance evaluation for sustainable business: a profitability and marketability framework," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(6), pages 311-319, November.
    11. Agle, Bradley R. & Donaldson, Thomas & Freeman, R. Edward & Jensen, Michael C. & Mitchell, Ronald K. & Wood, Donna J., 2008. "Dialogue: Toward Superior Stakeholder Theory," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(2), pages 153-190, April.
    12. Andrew A. King & Michael J. Lenox, 2001. "Does It Really Pay to Be Green? An Empirical Study of Firm Environmental and Financial Performance: An Empirical Study of Firm Environmental and Financial Performance," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 5(1), pages 105-116, January.
    13. R. Edward Freeman & S. Ramakrishna Velamuri, 2006. "A New Approach to CSR: Company Stakeholder Responsibility," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Andrew Kakabadse & Mette Morsing (ed.), Corporate Social Responsibility, chapter 1, pages 9-23, Palgrave Macmillan.
    14. Harrison, Jeffrey S. & Wicks, Andrew C., 2013. "Stakeholder Theory, Value, and Firm Performance," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(1), pages 97-124, January.
    15. Goodpaster, Kenneth E. & Holloran, Thomas E., 1994. "In Defense of a Paradox," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(4), pages 423-429, October.
    16. Lankoski, Leena & Smith, N. Craig & Van Wassenhove, Luk, 2016. "Stakeholder Judgments of Value," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 26(2), pages 227-256, April.
    17. Freeman, R. Edward, 1994. "The Politics of Stakeholder Theory: Some Future Directions1," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(4), pages 409-421, October.
    18. Burchell, Stuart & Clubb, Colin & Hopwood, Anthony G., 1985. "Accounting in its social context: Towards a history of value added in the United Kingdom," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 381-413, October.
    19. Goodpaster, Kenneth E., 1991. "Business Ethics and Stakeholder Analysis," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 53-73, January.
    20. van der Linden, Bastiaan & Freeman, R. Edward, 2017. "Profit and Other Values: Thick Evaluation in Decision Making," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(3), pages 353-379, July.
    21. Amy J. Hillman & Gerald D. Keim, 2001. "Shareholder value, stakeholder management, and social issues: what's the bottom line?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(2), pages 125-139, February.
    22. Cory Searcy, 2016. "Measuring Enterprise Sustainability," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(2), pages 120-133, February.
    23. Caterina Tantalo & Richard L. Priem, 2016. "Value creation through stakeholder synergy," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(2), pages 314-329, February.
    24. Balaji S. Chakravarthy, 1986. "Measuring strategic performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(5), pages 437-458, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dina Lucia Todaro & Riccardo Torelli, 2024. "From greenwashing to ESG‐washing: A focus on the circular economy field," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(5), pages 4034-4046, September.
    2. Pornanong Budsaratragoon & Boonlert Jitmaneeroj, 2021. "Corporate Sustainability and Stock Value in Asian–Pacific Emerging Markets: Synergies or Tradeoffs among ESG Factors?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-25, June.
    3. Amelia Bilbao-Terol & Mar Arenas-Parra & Raquel Quiroga-García & Celia Bilbao-Terol, 2024. "Is investing in the renewable energy stock market both financially and ESG efficient? A COVID-19 pandemic analysis," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 18(7), pages 1885-1916, July.
    4. Marius Banke & Stephanie Lenger & Christiane Pott, 2022. "ESG Ratings in the Corporate Reporting of DAX40 Companies in Germany: Effects on Market Participants," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-21, August.
    5. Wojciech Ćwięk & Andrzej Jaki & Łukasz Popławski & Tomasz Rojek, 2023. "Value-Creation Efficiency as a Decision-Making Basis and Its Assessment in the Financial Management of Energy Companies: Evidence from the Polish Capital Market," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-16, January.
    6. Radu-Alexandru Șerban & Diana Marieta Mihaiu & Mihai Țichindelean, 2022. "Environment, Social, and Governance Score and Value Added Impacts on Market Capitalization: A Sectoral-Based Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-25, February.
    7. Giuseppe Scandurra & Antonio Thomas, 2023. "The SDGs and Non-Financial Disclosures of Energy Companies: The Italian Experience," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-17, August.
    8. Jiang, Yihuo & Ni, Hongliang & Ni, Yihan & Guo, Xiaomei, 2023. "Assessing environmental, social, and governance performance and natural resource management policies in China's dual carbon era for a green economy," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(PB).
    9. Zoltán Csedő & József Magyari & Máté Zavarkó, 2022. "Dynamic Corporate Governance, Innovation, and Sustainability: Post-COVID Period," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-21, March.
    10. Beat Reber & Agnes Gold & Stefan Gold, 2022. "ESG Disclosure and Idiosyncratic Risk in Initial Public Offerings," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 179(3), pages 867-886, September.
    11. Juan Tan & Jinyu Wei, 2024. "Configurational Analysis of ESG Performance, Innovation Intensity, and Financial Leverage: a Study on Total Factor Productivity in Chinese Pharmaceutical Manufacturing Firms," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(3), pages 13803-13827, September.
    12. Dominik Bertram & Tobias Chilla & Carola Wilhelm, 2021. "Short Value Chains in Food Production: The Role of Spatial Proximity for Economic and Land Use Dynamics," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-21, September.
    13. Shirley Kempeneer & Michaël Peeters & Tine Compernolle, 2021. "Bringing the User Back in the Building: An Analysis of ESG in Real Estate and a Behavioral Framework to Guide Future Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-12, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Carlos Ferro-Soto & Luz Amparo Macías-Quintana & Paula Vázquez-Rodríguez, 2018. "Effect of Stakeholders-Oriented Behavior on the Performance of Sustainable Business," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-27, December.
    2. Bradley W. Benson & Wallace N. Davidson, 2010. "The Relation between Stakeholder Management, Firm Value, and CEO Compensation: A Test of Enlightened Value Maximization," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 39(3), pages 929-964, September.
    3. Danny Zhao‐Xiang Huang, 2022. "An integrated theory of the firm approach to environmental, social and governance performance," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(S1), pages 1567-1598, April.
    4. Mujtaba Ahsan, 2020. "Entrepreneurship and Ethics in the Sharing Economy: A Critical Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 161(1), pages 19-33, January.
    5. André Laplume & Kent Walker & Zhou Zhang & Xin Yu, 2021. "Incumbent Stakeholder Management Performance and New Entry," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 174(3), pages 629-644, December.
    6. Jeffrey S. Harrison & Joyce van der Laan Smith, 2015. "Responsible Accounting for Stakeholders," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(7), pages 935-960, November.
    7. Samuel Mansell, 2013. "Shareholder Theory and Kant’s ‘Duty of Beneficence’," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 117(3), pages 583-599, October.
    8. Rouwette, Etiënne & van Kranenburg, Hans & Freeman, Edward, 2017. "Reviewing the role of stakeholders in Operational Research: A stakeholder theory perspectiveAuthor-Name: de Gooyert, Vincent," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 262(2), pages 402-410.
    9. Wei Jiang & Aric Xu Wang & Kevin Zheng Zhou & Chuang Zhang, 2020. "Stakeholder Relationship Capability and Firm Innovation: A Contingent Analysis," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 167(1), pages 111-125, November.
    10. Rolf Brühl & Mathias Osann, 2010. "Stakeholdertheorie und Neoinstitutionalismus und ihre Beiträge zur Erklärung der freiwilligen Berichterstattung am Beispiel der immateriellen Ressourcen," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 277-298, November.
    11. Samantha Miles, 2012. "Stakeholder: Essentially Contested or Just Confused?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 108(3), pages 285-298, July.
    12. Ishrat Ali & Griffin W. Cottle, 2021. "Reconceptualizing Entrepreneurial Performance: The Creation and Destruction of Value from a Stakeholder Capabilities Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 170(4), pages 781-796, May.
    13. Lindsey, Kevin & Mauck, Nathan & Olsen, Ben, 2021. "The coming wave of small business succession and the role of stakeholder synergy theory," Global Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    14. Aseem Kaul & Jiao Luo, 2018. "An economic case for CSR: The comparative efficiency of for‐profit firms in meeting consumer demand for social goods," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(6), pages 1650-1677, June.
    15. John Manso Frimpong & Jacob Kuutoume & Christiana Abrafi Gyamfi, 2024. "Supply Chain Integration and Organizational Resources and Capabilities: The Moderating Effect of Stakeholders’ Support," International Review of Management and Marketing, Econjournals, vol. 14(4), pages 72-82, July.
    16. Dimes, Ruth & de Villiers, Charl, 2024. "Hallmarks of Integrated Thinking," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(1).
    17. Bai Xue & Zhuang Zhang & Pingli Li, 2020. "Corporate environmental performance, environmental management and firm risk," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 1074-1096, March.
    18. Francesco Perrini & Angeloantonio Russo & Antonio Tencati & Clodia Vurro, 2011. "Deconstructing the Relationship Between Corporate Social and Financial Performance," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 102(1), pages 59-76, March.
    19. Kamalesh Kumar & Giacomo Boesso & Giovanna Michelon, 2016. "How Do Strengths and Weaknesses in Corporate Social Performance Across Different Stakeholder Domains Affect Company Performance?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(4), pages 277-292, May.
    20. Ivan Fedorenko & Pierre Berthon, 2017. "Beyond the expected benefits: unpacking value co-creation in crowdsourcing business models," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 7(3), pages 183-194, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:3:p:1392-:d:489215. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.