Open Access
Issue
E3S Web Conf.
Volume 499, 2024
The 1st Trunojoyo Madura International Conference (1st TMIC 2023)
Article Number 01002
Number of page(s) 13
Section Dense Matter
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202449901002
Published online 06 March 2024
  1. N. O. D. Ellili, “Bibliometric analysis and systematic review of environmental, social, and governance disclosure papers: Current topics and recommendations for future research,” Environ. Res. Commun., vol. 4, no. 9, 2022, doi: 10.1088/2515-7620/ac8b67. [Google Scholar]
  2. S. Gao, F. Meng, Z. Gu, Z. Liu, and M. Farrukh, “Mapping and clustering analysis on environmental, social and governance field a bibliometric analysis using scopus,” Sustain., vol. 13, no. 13, 2021, doi: 10.3390/su13137304. [Google Scholar]
  3. S. S. Senadheera, R. Gregory, J. Rinklebe, M. Farrukh, J. H. Rhee, and Y. S. Ok, “The development of research on environmental, social, and governance (ESG): A bibliometric analysis,” Sustain. Environ., vol. 8, no. 1, 2022, doi: 10.1080/27658511.2022.2125869. [Google Scholar]
  4. G. Wan, A. Y. Dawod, S. Chanaim, and S. S. Ramasamy, “Hotspots and trends of environmental, social and governance (ESG) research: A bibliometric analysis,” Data Sci. Manag., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 65–75, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.dsm.2023.03.001. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  5. X. Zhao, D. Nan, C. Chen, S. Zhang, S. P. Che, and J. H. Kim, “Bibliometric study on environmental, social, and governance research using CiteSpace,” Front. Environ. Sci., vol. 10, no. January, pp. 1–12, 2023, doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2022.1087493. [Google Scholar]
  6. S. Du Rietz, “When accounts become information: A study of investors’ ESG analysis practice,” Scand. J. Manag., vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 395–408, 2014, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scaman.2014.09.002. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  7. M. A. Camilleri, “Environmental, social and governance disclosures in Europe,” Sustain. Accounting, Manag. Policy J., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 224–242, May 2015, doi: 10.1108/SAMPJ-10- 2014-0065. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  8. N. C. Ashwin Kumar, C. Smith, L. Badis, N. Wang, P. Ambrosy, and R. Tavares, “ESG factors and risk- adjusted performance: a new quantitative model,” J. Sustain. Financ. Invest., vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 292–300, 2016, doi: 10.1080/20430795.2016.1234909. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  9. N. Tamimi and R. Sebastianelli, “Transparency among S&P 500 companies: an analysis of ESG disclosure scores,” Manag. Decis., vol. 55, no. 8, pp. 1660–1680, Sep. 2017, doi: 10.1108/MD-01-2017-0018. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. S. Sultana, N. Zulkifli, and D. Zainal, “Environmental, social and governance (ESG) and investment decision in Bangladesh,” Sustain., vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 1–19, 2018, doi: 10.3390/su10061831. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  11. P. Velte, “The bidirectional relationship between ESG performance and earnings management – empirical evidence from Germany,” J. Glob. Responsib., vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 322–338, 2019, doi: 10.1108/JGR-01-2019-0001. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  12. P. Velte, “Does CEO power moderate the link between ESG performance and financial performance?: A focus on the German two-tier system,” Manag. Res. Rev., vol. 43, no. 5, pp. 497–520, 2020, doi: 10.1108/MRR-04-2019-0182. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  13. W. C. Wong, J. A. Batten, A. H. Ahmad, S. B. Mohamed-Arshad, S. Nordin, and A. A. Adzis, “Does ESG certification add firm value?,” Financ. Res. Lett., vol. 39, p. 101593, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.frl.2020.101593. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  14. N. Naeem, S. Cankaya, and R. Bildik, “Does ESG performance affect the financial performance of environmentally sensitive industries? A comparison between emerging and developed markets,” Borsa Istanbul Rev., vol. 22, pp. S128–S140, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.bir.2022.11.014. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  15. W. Puriwat and S. Tripopsakul, “Sustainability Matters: Unravelling the Power of ESG in Fostering Brand Love and Loyalty across Generations and Product Involvements,” Sustainability, vol. 15, no. 15. 2023. doi: 10.3390/su151511578. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  16. M. Alandejani and H. Al-Shaer, “Macro Uncertainty Impacts on ESG Performance and Carbon Emission Reduction Targets,” Sustain., vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 1–15, 2023, doi: 10.3390/su15054249. [Google Scholar]
  17. K. Bax, Ö. Sahin, C. Czado, and S. Paterlini, “ESG, risk, and (tail) dependence,” Int. Rev. Financ. Anal., vol. 87, no. 2020, p. 102513, May 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.irfa.2023.102513. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  18. G. de la Fuente, M. Ortiz, and P. Velasco, “The value of a firm’s engagement in ESG practices: Are we looking at the right side?,” Long Range Plann., vol. 55, no. 4, p. 102-143, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.lrp.2021.102143. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  19. A. Maaloul, D. Zéghal, W. Ben Amar, and S. Mansour, The Effect of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Performance and Disclosure on Cost of Debt: The Mediating Effect of Corporate Reputation, vol. 26, no. 1. 2023. doi: 10.1057/s41299-021-00130-8. [Google Scholar]
  20. C. Consolandi, R. G. Eccles, and G. Gabbi, “How material is a material issue? Stock returns and the financial relevance and financial intensity of ESG materiality,” J. Sustain. Financ. Invest., vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 1045–1068, 2022, doi: 10.1080/20430795.2020.1824889. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  21. L. Luo and Q. Tang, “The real effects of ESG reporting and GRI standards on carbon mitigation: International evidence,” Bus. Strateg. Environ., no. May, pp. 1–16, Oct. 2022, doi: 10.1002/bse.3281. [Google Scholar]
  22. N. Ahmad, A. Mobarek, and N. N. Roni, “Revisiting the impact of ESG on financial performance of FTSE350 UK firms: Static and dynamic panel data analysis,” Cogent Bus. Manag., vol. 8, no. 1, 2021, doi: 10.1080/23311975.2021.1900500. [Google Scholar]
  23. H. Takahashi and K. Yamada, “When the Japanese stock market meets COVID-19: Impact of ownership, China and US exposure, and ESG channels,” Int. Rev. Financ. Anal., vol. 74, no. February, p. 101670, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.irfa.2021.101670. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  24. Y. Eliwa, A. Aboud, and A. Saleh, “ESG practices and the cost of debt: Evidence from EU countries,” Crit. Perspect. Account., vol. 79, no. xxxx, p. 102097, Sep. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.cpa.2019.102097. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  25. D. Luo, “ESG, liquidity, and stock returns,” J. Int. Financ. Mark. Institutions Money, vol. 78, p. 101526, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.intfin.2022.101526. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  26. M. Billio, M. Costola, I. Hristova, C. Latino, and L. Pelizzon, “Inside the ESG ratings: (Dis)agreement and performance,” Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag., vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 1426–1445, 2021, doi: 10.1002/csr.2177. [Google Scholar]
  27. C. Huang, Y. Chan, and M. Y. Hsieh, “The Determinants of ESG for Community LOHASism Sustainable Development Strategy,” Sustainability, vol. 14, no. 18, p. 11429, Sep. 2022, doi: 10.3390/su141811429. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  28. Sustainalytics, ESG for IPOs: Becoming ESG- Ready for ESG for IPOs. Morningstar Sustainalytics, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  29. M. Sciarelli, G. Landi, L. Turriziani, and A. Prisco, “Does corporate sustainability mitigate firm risk? An empirical analysis on S&P 500 controversial companies,” Soc. Responsib. J., May 2023, doi: 10.1108/SRJ-09-2021-0388. [Google Scholar]
  30. C. Champagne, F. Coggins, and A. Sodjahin, “Can extra-financial ratings serve as an indicator of ESG risk?,” Glob. Financ. J., vol. 54, no. February, p. 100638, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.gfj.2021.100638. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  31. S. Treepongkaruna, K. Kyaw, and P. Jiraporn, “Shareholder litigation rights and ESG controversies: A quasi-natural experiment,” Int. Rev. Financ. Anal., vol. 84, p. 102396, 2022, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2022.102396. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  32. M. Singal, “The Link between Firm Financial Performance and Investment in Sustainability Initiatives,” Cornell Hosp. Q., vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 19–30, 2014, doi: 10.1177/1938965513505700. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  33. G. Dorfleitner, G. Halbritter, and M. Nguyen, “Measuring the level and risk of corporate responsibility – An empirical comparison of different ESG rating approaches,” J. Asset Manag., vol. 16, no. 7, pp. 450–466, 2015, doi: 10.1057/jam.2015.31. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  34. E. van Duuren, A. Plantinga, and B. Scholtens, “ESG Integration and the Investment Management Process: Fundamental Investing Reinvented,” J. Bus. Ethics, vol. 138, no. 3, pp. 525–533, 2016, doi: 10.1007/s10551-015-2610-8. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  35. M. A. Harjoto, Corporate social responsibility and corporate fraud, vol. 13, no. 4. 2017. doi: 10.1108/SRJ-09-2016-0166. [Google Scholar]
  36. A. Aouadi and S. Marsat, “Do ESG Controversies Matter for Firm Value? Evidence from International Data,” J. Bus. Ethics, vol. 151, no. 4, pp. 1027–1047, 2018, doi: 10.1007/s10551-016-3213-8. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  37. I. Tamayo-Torres, L. Gutierrez-Gutierrez, and A. Ruiz-Moreno, “Boosting sustainability and financial performance: the role of supply chain controversies,” Int. J. Prod. Res., vol. 57, no. 11, pp. 3719–3734, Jun. 2019, doi: 10.1080/00207543.2018.1562248. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  38. I. W. K. Ting, N. A. Azizan, R. K. Bhaskaran, and S. K. Sukumaran, “Corporate social performance and firm performance: Comparative study among developed and emerging market firms,” Sustain., vol. 12, no. 1, 2020, doi: 10.3390/SU12010026. [Google Scholar]
  39. G. Dorfleitner, C. Kreuzer, and R. Laschinger, “How socially irresponsible are socially responsible mutual funds? A persistence analysis.,” Financ. Res. Lett., vol. 43, no. October 2020, p. 101990, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.frl.2021.101990. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  40. Y. H. (Andy) Kim, J. Park, and H. Shin, “CEO facial masculinity, fraud, and ESG: Evidence from South Korea,” Emerg. Mark. Rev., vol. 53, p. 100917, Dec. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.ememar.2022.100917. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  41. A. Edmans, “The end of ESG,” Financ. Manag., vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 3–17, Mar. 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/fima.12413. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  42. A. Kashi and M. E. Shah, “Bibliometric Review on Sustainable Finance,” Sustain., vol. 15, no. 9, 2023, doi: 10.3390/su15097119. [Google Scholar]
  43. S. Galletta, S. Mazzù, and V. Naciti, “A bibliometric analysis of ESG performance in the banking industry: From the current status to future directions,” Res. Int. Bus. Financ., vol. 62, p. 101684, 2022, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2022.101684. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  44. M. A. Khan, “ESG disclosure and Firm performance: A bibliometric and meta analysis,” Res. Int. Bus. Financ., vol. 61, p. 101668, 2022, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2022.101668. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  45. R. Savio, E. D’Andrassi, and F. Ventimiglia, “A Systematic Literature Review on ESG during the COVID-19 Pandemic,” Sustainability, vol. 15, no. 3, p. 2020, Jan. 2023, doi: 10.3390/su15032020. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  46. L. Widyawati, “A systematic literature review of socially responsible investment and environmental social governance metrics,” Bus. Strateg. Environ., vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 619–637, Feb. 2020, doi: 10.1002/bse.2393. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  47. D. Daugaard, “Emerging new themes in environmental, social and governance investing: a systematic literature review,” Account. Financ., vol. 60, no. 2, pp. 1501–1530, 2020, doi: 10.1111/acfi.12479. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  48. A. Poyser and D. Daugaard, “Indigenous sustainable finance as a research field: A systematic literature review on indigenising ESG, sustainability and indigenous community practices,” Account. Financ., vol. 63, no. 1, pp. 47–76, Mar. 2023, doi: 10.1111/acfi.13062. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  49. E. Steblianskaia, M. Vasiev, A. Denisov, V. Bocharnikov, A. Steblyanskaya, and Q. Wang, “Environmental-social-governance concept bibliometric analysis and systematic literature review: Do investors becoming more environmentally conscious?,” Environ. Sustain. Indic., vol. 17, no. August 2022, p. 100218, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.indic.2022.100218. [Google Scholar]
  50. A. Melinda and R. Wardhani, “the Effect of Environmental, Social, Governance, and Controversies on Firms’ Value: Evidence From Asia,” Int. Symp. Econ. Theory Econom., vol. 27, no. June 2020, pp. 147–173, 2020, doi: 10.1108/S1571-038620200000027011. [Google Scholar]
  51. R. K. Bhaskaran, I. W. K. Ting, S. K. Sukumaran, and S. D. Sumod, “Environmental, social and governance initiatives and wealth creation for firms: An empirical examination,” Manag. Decis. Econ., vol. 41, no. 5, pp. 710–729, 2020, doi: 10.1002/mde.3131. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  52. A. P. Iannuzzi, S. Dell’Atti, E. D’Apolito, and S. Galletta, “Nomination committee characteristics and exposure to environmental, social and governance (ESG) controversies: evidence from European global systemically important banks,” Corp. Gov., 2023, doi: 10.1108/CG-03-2022-0119. [Google Scholar]
  53. I. Passas, K. Ragazou, E. Zafeiriou, A. Garefalakis, and C. Zopounidis, “ESG Controversies: A Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis for the Sociopolitical Determinants in EU Firms,” Sustain., vol. 14, no. 19, pp. 1–17, 2022, doi: 10.3390/su141912879. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  54. ACFE and G. Thornton, Managing Fraud Risks in an Evolving ESG Environment. 2022. [Google Scholar]
  55. D. R. Cressey, “The Criminal Violation of Financial Trust,” Am. Sociol. Rev., vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 738–743, 1950. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  56. G. Cohen, “The impact of ESG risks on corporate value,” Rev. Quant. Financ. Account., vol. 60, no. 4, pp. 1451–1468, 2023, doi: 10.1007/s11156-023- 01135-6. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  57. M. H. Shakil, “Environmental, social and governance performance and financial risk: Moderating role of ESG controversies and board gender diversity,” Resour. Policy, vol. 72, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.resourpol.2021.102144. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  58. G. Cohen, “ESG risks and corporate survival,” Environ. Syst. Decis., vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 16–21, 2023, doi: 10.1007/s10669-022-09886-8. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  59. D. Fiaschi, E. Giuliani, F. Nieri, and N. Salvati, “How bad is your company? Measuring corporate wrongdoing beyond the magic of ESG metrics,” Bus. Horiz., vol. 63, no. 3, pp. 287–299, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.bushor.2019.09.004. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  60. J. Svanberg et al., “Corporate governance performance ratings with machine learning,” Intell. Syst. Accounting, Financ. Manag., vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 50–68, 2022, doi: 10.1002/isaf.1505. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  61. D. V. Fauser and S. Utz, “Risk Mitigation of Corporate Social Performance in US Class Action Lawsuits,” Financ. Anal. J., vol. 77, no. 2, pp. 43–65, 2021, doi: 10.1080/0015198X.2020.1861896. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  62. J. E. Koo and E. S. Ki, “Internal Control Personnel’s Experience, Internal Control Weaknesses, and ESG Rating,” Sustainability, vol. 12, no. 20, p. 8645, Oct. 2020, doi: 10.3390/su12208645. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  63. A. Issa and J. R. Hanaysha, “Breaking the glass ceiling for a sustainable future: the power of women on corporate boards in reducing ESG controversies,” Int. J. Account. Inf. Manag., 2023, doi: 10.1108/IJAIM-03-2023-0053. [Google Scholar]
  64. I. Arribas, M. D. Espinós-Vañó, F. García, and N. Riley, “Do irresponsible corporate activities prevent membership in sustainable stock indices? The case of the Dow Jones Sustainability Index world,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 298, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126711. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  65. G. Dorfleitner, C. Kreuzer, and C. Sparrer, “ESG controversies and controversial ESG: about silent saints and small sinners,” J. Asset Manag., vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 393–412, 2020, doi: 10.1057/s41260- 020-00178-x. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  66. A. Del Giudice and S. Rigamonti, “Does Audit Improve the Quality of ESG Scores? Evidence from Corporate Misconduct,” Sustainability, vol. 12, no. 14, p. 5670, Jul. 2020, doi: 10.3390/su12145670. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  67. M. Alda, “The reaction to CSR controversies by institutional investors,” BRQ Bus. Res. Q., 2022, doi: 10.1177/23409444221110588. [Google Scholar]
  68. D. Lee and D. J. Hess, “Measuring corporate social responsibility: an evaluation of a new sustainable development goals index for Fortune 500 companies,” Int. J. Organ. Anal., vol. 30, no. 7, pp. 137–154, 2022, doi: 10.1108/IJOA-12-2021-3082. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  69. M. Anita, S. Shveta, S. Yadav Surendra, and M. Arvind, “When do ESG controversies reduce firm value in India?,” Glob. Financ. J., vol. 55, no. May, p. 100809, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.gfj.2023.100809. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  70. D. Z. X. Huang, “An integrated theory of the firm approach to environmental, social and governance performance,” Account. Financ., vol. 62, no. S1, pp. 1567–1598, 2022, doi: 10.1111/acfi.12832. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  71. UNWTO, “International Tourism back to 60% of pre-pandemic levels in January-July 2022,” World Tour. Organ., vol. 20, no. 5, p. 1, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  72. World Bank, “How COVID-19 is changing the world: a statistical perspective Volume III,” Comm. Coord. Stat. Act., vol. 3, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  73. T. TARJO et al., “Explore the Potential for Tourist Scams in Indonesia,” J. Environ. Manag. Tour., vol. 14, no. 2, p. 362, Mar. 2023, doi: 10.14505/jemt.v14.2(66).06. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  74. D. Khullar, A. M. Bond, and W. L. Schpero, “COVID-19 and the Financial Health of US Hospitals,” JAMA - J. Am. Med. Assoc., vol. 323, no. 21, pp. 2127–2128, 2020, doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.6269. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  75. A. Rababah, L. Al-Haddad, M. S. Sial, Z. Chunmei, and J. Cherian, “Analyzing the effects of COVID-19 pandemic on the financial performance of Chinese listed companies,” J. Public Aff., vol. 20, no. 4, 2020, doi: 10.1002/pa.2440. [Google Scholar]
  76. Z. Liu et al., “Research on optimization of healthcare waste management system based on green governance principle in the covid-19 pandemic,” Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, vol. 18, no. 10, 2021, doi: 10.3390/ijerph18105316. [Google Scholar]
  77. H. El-Ramady et al., “Planning for disposal of COVID-19 pandemic wastes in developing countries: a review of current challenges,” Environ. Monit. Assess., vol. 193, no. 9, 2021, doi: 10.1007/s10661-021-09350-1. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.