IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i17p13114-d1229837.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Role of Environment, Social, and Governance Performance in Shaping Corporate Current and Future Value: The Case of Global Tech Leaders

Author

Listed:
  • Lingfu Kong

    (School of Business, Zhengzhou University of Aeronautics, Zhengzhou 450046, China)

  • Minhas Akbar

    (Department of Informatics and Quantitative Methods, Faculty of Informatics and Management, University of Hradec Kralove, 500 03 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic)

  • Petra Poulova

    (Department of Informatics and Quantitative Methods, Faculty of Informatics and Management, University of Hradec Kralove, 500 03 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic)

Abstract

Corporations that prioritize Environment, Social, and Governance (ESG) considerations tend to have a more sustainable approach to business operations with a lower impact on the environment and society. Extant literature is available on the impact of ESG on firm performance, risk-taking, profitability, the cost of capital, cash flows, and default risk. However, very little is known about the role of ESG performance in shaping the current and future value of a corporation. Similarly, hi-tech firms, being a part of the rapidly growing sector of the world, are facing greater scrutiny from investors, regulators, and consumers to demonstrate their commitment to sustainability and social responsibility. This paper investigates the effect of ESG performance on the corporate present and future value of top global tech leaders for a period of eight years (2010 to 2017). Panel data techniques such as the fixed effects model and random effects model based on the Hausman test were used to observe this relationship. Earnings per share (EPS) and the price-to-earnings ratio (PE ratio) were used as a measure of firm current and future value, respectively. The results revealed that ESG has a significantly positive association with both proxies of corporate value of the top global tech companies. However, as compared to EPS, it had a more pronounced impact on the PE ratio of the sampled firms. Unlike many earlier studies that claimed that the ESG score impacts firm performance in the corresponding period, the present research is novel, as it asserts that investors are not only benefiting from firms’ higher investment in ESG through an increase in EPS but are also highly optimistic about the future performance of the firm and thus are paying more for each dollar of earnings. These finding contribute to the existing body of literature on the ESG and firm value nexus and are supported by the stakeholder theory of corporate social responsibility. Thus, policymakers for the tech sector should pay keen attention to firms’ ESG performance to earn the long-term trust of shareholders.

Suggested Citation

  • Lingfu Kong & Minhas Akbar & Petra Poulova, 2023. "The Role of Environment, Social, and Governance Performance in Shaping Corporate Current and Future Value: The Case of Global Tech Leaders," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-14, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:17:p:13114-:d:1229837
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/17/13114/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/17/13114/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sandra A. Waddock & Samuel B. Graves, 1997. "The Corporate Social Performance–Financial Performance Link," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(4), pages 303-319, April.
    2. El Ghoul, Sadok & Guedhami, Omrane & Kwok, Chuck C.Y. & Mishra, Dev R., 2011. "Does corporate social responsibility affect the cost of capital?," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 2388-2406, September.
    3. Fatemi, Ali & Glaum, Martin & Kaiser, Stefanie, 2018. "ESG performance and firm value: The moderating role of disclosure," Global Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 45-64.
    4. Jennifer Francis & Dhananjay Nanda & Per Olsson, 2008. "Voluntary Disclosure, Earnings Quality, and Cost of Capital," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(1), pages 53-99, March.
    5. Ersan Ersoy & Beata Swiecka & Simon Grima & Ercan Özen & Inna Romanova, 2022. "The Impact of ESG Scores on Bank Market Value? Evidence from the U.S. Banking Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-14, August.
    6. Oh-Suk Yang & Jae-Hoon Han, 2023. "Assessing the Effect of Corporate ESG Management on Corporate Financial & Market Performance and Export," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-30, January.
    7. Sakis Kotsantonis & Chris Pinney & George Serafeim, 2016. "ESG Integration in Investment Management: Myths and Realities," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 28(2), pages 10-16, June.
    8. Bohyun Yoon & Jeong Hwan Lee & Ryan Byun, 2018. "Does ESG Performance Enhance Firm Value? Evidence from Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-18, October.
    9. 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.
    10. Xin Jin & Xue Lei, 2023. "A Study on the Mechanism of ESG’s Impact on Corporate Value under the Concept of Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-22, May.
    11. Hoje Jo & Maretno Harjoto, 2012. "The Causal Effect of Corporate Governance on Corporate Social Responsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 106(1), pages 53-72, March.
    12. Muhammad Azeem Qureshi & Minhas Akbar & Ahsan Akbar & Petra Poulova, 2021. "Do ESG Endeavors Assist Firms in Achieving Superior Financial Performance? A Case of 100 Best Corporate Citizens," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(2), pages 21582440211, June.
    13. Xiaoling Yu & Kaitian Xiao, 2022. "Does ESG Performance Affect Firm Value? Evidence from a New ESG-Scoring Approach for Chinese Enterprises," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-40, December.
    14. Minhas Akbar & Ahsan Akbar & Petra Maresova & Minghui Yang & Hafiz Muhammad Arshad, 2020. "Unraveling the Bankruptcy Risk‒Return Paradox across the Corporate Life Cycle," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-19, April.
    15. Jeremy Galbreath, 2013. "ESG in Focus: The Australian Evidence," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 118(3), pages 529-541, December.
    16. Xin Xu & Zizhen Liu, 2023. "ESG, Cultural Distance and Corporate Profitability: Evidence from Chinese Multinationals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-23, April.
    17. Lee Siew Peng & Mansor Isa, 2020. "Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) Practices And Performance In Shariah Firms: Agency or Stakeholder Theory?," Asian Academy of Management Journal of Accounting and Finance (AAMJAF), Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia, vol. 16(1), pages 1-34.
    18. 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.
    19. Jun Huang & Zhixin Duan & Guowei Zhu, 2017. "Does Corporate Social Responsibility Affect the Cost of Bank Loans? Evidence from China," Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(7), pages 1589-1602, July.
    20. Rob Bauer & Jeroen Derwall & Rogér Otten, 2007. "The Ethical Mutual Fund Performance Debate: New Evidence from Canada," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 70(2), pages 111-124, January.
    21. Jianzhuang Zheng & Muhammad Usman Khurram & Lifeng Chen, 2022. "Can Green Innovation Affect ESG Ratings and Financial Performance? Evidence from Chinese GEM Listed Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-32, July.
    22. Bhagat, Sanjai & Bolton, Brian, 2008. "Corporate governance and firm performance," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 257-273, June.
    23. Herenia Gutiérrez-Ponce & Sigit Arie Wibowo, 2023. "Do Sustainability Activities Affect the Financial Performance of Banks? The Case of Indonesian Banks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-17, April.
    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. Xiangrong Wan & Fanghui Pan & Chenyang Liu & Jing Zhao & Cuixia Li, 2024. "The Impact of Profitability Sustainability on Innovation in Dairy Companies: The Multiple Moderating Effects of Corporate Social Responsibility," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(14), pages 1-25, July.
    2. R. David Ratigan & Peter A. Zaleski, 2024. "Managerial Performance and Economic Performance in the Technology Sector," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 52(2), pages 117-130, September.
    3. Emmanuel Jeffrey Dzage & György Norbert Szabados, 2024. "The Relationship of Corporate Social Responsibility with Business Performance—A Bibliometric Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-25, 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. Champagne, Claudia & Coggins, Frank & Sodjahin, Amos, 2022. "Can extra-financial ratings serve as an indicator of ESG risk?," Global Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    2. Veeravel, V & Murugesan, Vijaya Prabhagar & Narayanamurthy, Vijayakumar, 2024. "Does ESG disclosure really influence the firm performance? Evidence from India," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 193-202.
    3. 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.
    4. Francesco Gangi & Jérôme Méric & Rémi Jardat & Lucia Michela Daniele, 2019. "Business for society," Post-Print hal-02382307, HAL.
    5. Irene Wei Kiong Ting & Noor Azlinna Azizan & Rajesh Kumar Bhaskaran & Sujit K Sukumaran, 2019. "Corporate Social Performance and Firm Performance: Comparative Study among Developed and Emerging Market Firms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-21, December.
    6. Xiaoling Yu & Kaitian Xiao, 2022. "Does ESG Performance Affect Firm Value? Evidence from a New ESG-Scoring Approach for Chinese Enterprises," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-40, December.
    7. Mario La Torre & Sabrina Leo & Ida Claudia Panetta, 2021. "Banks and environmental, social and governance drivers: Follow the market or the authorities?," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(6), pages 1620-1634, November.
    8. Pruthiranjan Dwibedi & Debasis Pahi & Antarjyami Sahu, 2024. "Mapping the landscape of environmental, social and governance research: A bibliometric analysis," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(5), pages 3745-3767, September.
    9. Francesco Gangi & Eugenio D'Angelo & Lucia Michela Daniele & Nicola Varrone, 2021. "Assessing the impact of socially responsible human resources management on company environmental performance and cost of debt," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(5), pages 1511-1527, September.
    10. Yu, Haixu & Liang, Chuanyu & Liu, Zhaohua & Wang, He, 2023. "News-based ESG sentiment and stock price crash risk," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    11. Adam Arian & John Sands & Stuart Tooley, 2023. "Industry and Stakeholder Impacts on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Financial Performance: Consumer vs. Industrial Sectors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-21, August.
    12. Atif Ikram & Zhichuan (Frank) Li & Travis MacDonald, 2020. "CEO Pay Sensitivity (Delta and Vega) and Corporate Social Responsibility," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-20, September.
    13. Angus W. H. Yip & William Y. P. Yu, 2023. "The Quality of Environmental KPI Disclosure in ESG Reporting for SMEs in Hong Kong," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-26, February.
    14. He, Guanming & Li, Zhichao & Yu, Ling & Zhou, Zhanqiang, 2023. "Contribution to poverty alleviation: A waste or benefit for corporate financing?," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    15. Rui Coelho & Shital Jayantilal & Joao J. Ferreira, 2023. "The impact of social responsibility on corporate financial performance: A systematic literature review," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(4), pages 1535-1560, July.
    16. Ruixi Long & Shuyang Jia, 2023. "Foreground or background my social responsibility: impact of the trade war on the readability of corporate social responsibility disclosures," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 79-97, March.
    17. Bae, Kee-Hong & El Ghoul, Sadok & Guedhami, Omrane & Kwok, Chuck C.Y. & Zheng, Ying, 2019. "Does corporate social responsibility reduce the costs of high leverage? Evidence from capital structure and product market interactions," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 135-150.
    18. Van Ha Nguyen & Frank W Agbola & Bobae Choi, 2019. "Does corporate social responsibility reduce information asymmetry? Empirical evidence from Australia," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 44(2), pages 188-211, May.
    19. Paolo Capelli & Federica Ielasi & Angeloantonio Russo, 2021. "Forecasting volatility by integrating financial risk with environmental, social, and governance risk," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(5), pages 1483-1495, September.
    20. Sana Noor & Abubakr Saeed & Muhammad Saad Baloch & Muhammad Awais, 2020. "CSR permanency, family ownership, and firm value: Evidence from emerging economies," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(5), pages 2135-2149, September.

    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:15:y:2023:i:17:p:13114-:d:1229837. 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.