• Contributors

Introduction to ESG

environmental corporate governance essay

Mark S. Bergman ,  Ariel J. Deckelbaum , and Brad S. Karp are partners at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP. This post is based on a recent Paul Weiss memorandum by Mr. Bergman, Mr. Deckelbaum, Mr. Karp,  David Curran ,  Jeh Charles Johnson , and Loretta E. Lynch . Related research from the Program on Corporate Governance includes The Illusory Promise of Stakeholder Governance by Lucian A. Bebchuk and Roberto Tallarita (discussed on the Forum here ) and Socially Responsible Firms by Alan Ferrell, Hao Liang, and Luc Renneboog (discussed on the Forum here ).

Interest on the part of investors and other corporate stakeholders in environmental, social and governance (“ESG”) matters has surged in recent years, and the current economic, public health and social justice crises have only intensified this focus. ESG, at its core, is a means by which companies can be evaluated with respect to a broad range of socially desirable ends. ESG describes a set of factors used to measure the non-financial impacts of particular investments and companies. At the same time, ESG also provides a range of business and investment opportunities.

Net flows into ESG funds available to U.S. investors have skyrocketed, totalling $20.6 billion in 2019, nearly four times the previous annual record set in 2018, [1] while ESG funds in Europe also attracted record inflows of $132 billion in 2019. [2] More than 70% of funds focused on ESG investments outperformed their counterparts in the first four months of 2020, [3] and nearly 60% of ESG funds outperformed the wider market over the past decade. [4] Consumers and investors are placing a growing value on ESG, and industry leaders have responded in a number of ways, including issuing comprehensive sustainability reports and expanding ESG disclosures in their annual reports, providing information to ESG rating agencies and publicly communicating ESG commitments.

This post, the first in a series focused on ESG disclosure and regulatory developments, provides an introduction to ESG and identifies several critical issues for companies and their in-house counsel to keep in mind in evaluating and monitoring ESG actions and statements.

The Fundamentals of ESG

ESG grew out of investment philosophies clustered around sustainability and, thereafter, socially responsible investing. Early efforts focused on “screening out” (that is, excluding) companies from portfolios largely due to environmental, social or governance concerns, while more recently ESG has favorably distinguished companies that are making positive contributions to the elements of ESG, premised on treating environmental and social issues as core elements of strategic positioning. While climate figures prominently in ESG discussions, there is no single list of ESG goals or examples, and ESG concepts often overlap. That being said, the three categories of ESG are increasingly integrated into investment analysis, processes and decision-making.

  • The “E” captures energy efficiencies, carbon footprints, greenhouse gas emissions, deforestation, biodiversity, climate change and pollution mitigation, waste management and water usage.
  • The “S” covers labor standards, wages and benefits, workplace and board diversity, racial justice, pay equity, human rights, talent management, community relations, privacy and data protection, health and safety, supply-chain management and other human capital and social justice issues.
  • The “G” covers the governing of the “E” and the “S” categories—corporate board composition and structure, strategic sustainability oversight and compliance, executive compensation, political contributions and lobbying, and bribery and corruption.

ESG metrics have evolved in recent years to measure risk as well as opportunity. In his “Dear CEO” letter in 2018, BlackRock Chairman and CEO Larry Fink wrote that:

[s]ociety is demanding that companies, both public and private, serve a social purpose. To prosper over time, every company must not only deliver financial performance, but also show how it makes a positive contribution to society. Companies must benefit all of their stakeholders, including shareholders, employees, customers, and the communities in which they operate.

He goes on to say that:

Companies must ask themselves: What role do we play in the community? How are we managing our impact on the environment? Are we working to create a diverse workforce? Are we adapting to technological change? Are we providing the retraining and opportunities that our employees and our business will need to adjust to an increasingly automated world? Are we using behavioral finance and other tools to prepare workers for retirement, so that they invest in a way that will help them achieve their goals? [5]

Other leading business leaders have also supported more expansive views regarding the purpose of a corporation. In August 2019, the Business Roundtable, a non-profit organization comprised of corporate CEOs, released a new Statement on the Purpose of a Corporation (the “BRT Statement”). [6] The BRT Statement was signed by the CEOs of nearly 200 leading U.S. companies and identified shareholders as one of five key stakeholders—along with customers, workers, suppliers and communities. The BRT Statement supersedes prior statements that endorsed shareholder primacy (the idea that corporations exist principally to serve shareholders), and “outlines a modern standard for corporate responsibility.” [7]

ESG in Practice

Under the current disclosure regime applicable to public companies listed in the United States, there is no affirmative duty to provide disclosures on ESG matters. As a practical matter, however, it can be anticipated that important stakeholders, such as investors, insurance companies, lenders, regulators and others, will increasingly look to companies’ disclosures to allow them to evaluate whether those companies have embraced ESG agendas. And, even in the absence of an affirmative duty to disclose, the substance of the information that companies do elect to report regarding their actions to identify and manage ESG risks and opportunities will be subject to the securities laws.

As we will discuss in future posts in this series, the ESG regulatory landscape regarding disclosure is rapidly evolving. While there is a general recognition of the value of, and the imperative for, consistent and decision-critical information to more easily evaluate how companies are overseeing and managing ESG-related risks and opportunities, most companies have yet to achieve that level of consistency. Moreover, ESG factors cover a broad range of activities that may or may not be relevant to particular businesses and their performance, or their potential positive effect on communities, or more broadly, societies. These metrics need to be refined. Accordingly, a prudent public company will find it desirable to establish its own criteria for determining the scope and content of its ESG disclosures, both to mitigate legal risk and identify future opportunities that ESG presents in terms of growth and differentiation.

In the absence of international consensus regarding ESG disclosures, a number of frameworks and indices have emerged to guide company disclosures and inform investors. Some of the leading international frameworks include the Global Reporting Initiative standards, the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) standards, the United Nations Principles for Responsible Investment and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Ratings have also proliferated over the last decade. Morgan Stanley Capital International (MSCI) and specialist firms such as Sustainalytics have recently been joined by traditional credit rating agencies such as Moody’s and S&P Global. A recent estimate suggests that the “global market for ESG ratings is currently worth about $200m and could grow to $500m within five years.” [8] The influence of these frameworks and rating agencies is such that they may shape regulation to come.

ESG is also influenced by public opinion. ESG issues are inherently reputational, especially given recent societal events. As more companies provide ESG disclosures and commitments, and given the speed of social media responses and the news cycle, observations about a company’s ESG actions or inactions are often published and sometimes go viral. Companies that are out of step with public opinion and market demands may face punishing reputational consequences.

Matching Aspiration and Action

We will describe in subsequent alerts the challenges faced by companies in developing a disclosure posture that satisfies the needs of a growing number of stakeholders, as well as the challenges faced by many of those stakeholders in obtaining information that is consistent and decision-critical. While ESG disclosures today are, from an SEC perspective, purely voluntary, over time that could change, and in the meantime there may be increasing pressure from a range of stakeholders to incorporate ESG statements. If a company’s ESG disclosures (for example, those in relation to compliance with legal, regulatory or voluntary standards or a particular commitment to achieve an ESG-positive outcome) later appear to be false or misleading, the company could face reputational backlash, shareholder lawsuits or possibly regulatory enforcement. Putting aside which disclosure standards they adopt, companies should ensure that they take a systematic approach to ESG reporting.

We highlight below considerations that should facilitate tying aspirations to actions and mitigating legal and reputational risks for commitments that cannot realistically be achieved:

  • Monitor internal ESG disclosures and commitments . Management should appoint a team tasked with monitoring the company’s ESG disclosures and commitments, recognizing that these statements can appear in a variety of formal communications ( g. , SEC filings, or in documents incorporated by reference in SEC filings, sustainability reports and corporate responsibility reports) as well as informal communications ( e.g. , communications to employees, social media posts, media interviews and website postings). The team should identify existing ESG commitments to establish a baseline. Thereafter, the team should have a procedure in place to monitor ESG disclosures of the company as well as of peer firms.
  • ESG statements made publicly should be vetted for factual accuracy and context in the same way as any other statement of fact.
  • Forward-looking commitments should be qualified as such, much as other forward-looking statements are (with aspirational qualifiers and appropriate disclaimers).
  • Management should consider extending the internal disclosure controls and procedures process to ESG statements, since some statements may well find their way into SEC filings.
  • Even though ESG disclosure standards are not mandatory, the SEC has noted that it will be comparing information that is voluntarily provided with disclosures made in SEC reports and registration statements, which is consistent with its general approach of monitoring analyst and investor calls as well as other statements made outside of SEC filings (for example, to police the use of non-GAAP financial measures and selective disclosure rules).
  • As with all material statements that are included in public disclosure, coordination among the relevant internal constituencies is critical and collaboration should be encouraged.
  • Educate employees on the risks associated with ESG disclosures . Employees responsible for preparing and updating ESG disclosures should be sensitized to the risks associated with public disclosures and to the importance of ensuring that ESG statements are consistent with the company’s description of its business, its MD&A and its risk factors in annual and quarterly reports, even if those latter disclosures have no apparent ESG themes.
  • Measure ESG performance . The ESG team should establish procedures to determine whether the company’s actions match its public ESG goals, the standards set by industry leaders and the frameworks established by third parties that the company has committed to—or is required to—follow. Doing so can help a company identify any vulnerabilities in order to mitigate potential legal and reputational risks.

1 See Greg Iacurci, “Money moving into environmental funds shatters previous record,” CNBC (January 14, 2020) , available here . (go back)

2 Lucca De Paoli, “European ESG Funds Pulled in Record $132 Billion in 2019,” Bloomberg (January 31, 2020), available here . (go back)

3 See Madison Darbyshire, “ESG funds continue to outperform wider market,” Financial Times (April 3, 2020), available here . (go back)

4 See Siobhan Riding, “Majority of ESG funds outperform wider market over 10 years,” Financial Times (June 13, 2020), available here . (go back)

5 Larry Fink, Blackrock, “‘Dear CEO Letter” (2018), available here . (go back)

6 Business Roundtable, “Business Roundtable Redefines the Purpose of a Corporation to Promote ‘An Economy That Serves All Americans’” (August 19, 2019), available here . (go back)

7 Id . (go back)

8 Billy Nauman, “Credit rating agencies join battle for ESG supremacy,” Financial Times   (September 17, 2019), available here . (go back)

One Comment

Common ESG metrics by Deloitte, EY, KPMG, PwC: Please show business case.

The Big Four accounting firms EY, PwC, KPMG, and Deloitte have unveiled on 22 September 2020 a paper proposing to harmonize ESG reporting standards. However, they have not presented any business case. Real data with real companies is what is needed.

Author: Sharafat A. Paracha, 25 September 2020.

Many years ago, before ESG was even coined, I was a young graduate with a Masters’ in Sustainability and I proposed Bordier & Cie, one of the oldest private banks in Geneva (and the only one to have maintained its unlimited liability status), to develop a Corporate Social Responsibility Index for one of its clients. That was 1999 and again in 2000. Claude Morgenegg, the person who hired me, had a Ph.D. in mathematics and in charge of the analysis team. He looked at the general framework I submitted to and then said: you have a model. Great! Now prove it works by collecting the data. That is when reality kicked me in the face and showed me that it was easier said than done.

So, I had to design a system for collecting the data I needed that was not publicly available. Remember, this was before sustainability reports were a common staple. Only a few Scandinavian companies were informing the public on CSR issues. I had to design a questionnaire to give to companies and follow-up with them to obtain answers. Answers from companies were not enough. No, no, no. I had to validate their answers by conducting investigations into their activities around the world, comparing their reports from what NGOs and other sources said. Then I had to convert it all into understandable, measurable and comparable metrics before arriving at a final selection. Then, there was the process of analyzing all the information I had, filtering it and assessing it before it could be ready to be transcribed into a system of notation. This CSR index needed also to be reproducible in the future. Only then one could use it for decision making in portfolio selection. I still have the work I did for them in a diskette. Remember those? I cannot read it as the technology is now obsolete. It was hard work which I did alone but with good guidance and serious oversight. It was necessary as what was at stake was tens of millions of Swiss francs and Bordier & Cie reputation to deliver to the client and to the rest of the private banks. Bordier & Cie became among the first private banks in Switzerland to offer CSR analysis to its clients.

The situation in ESG now in 2020 is completely different from 20 years ago. Sustainability reports have become a staple for corporations. There are a plethora of sustainability standards. There are now teams of ESG analysts who work in banks and for specialized funds producing streams of reports regularly. There is an overload of sustainability perspectives, systems and data. Complexity in ESG has become the norm.

The big four accounting firms EY, PwC, KPMG, and Deloitte are not facing the challenges I faced. They are not alone and are not operating with limited resources. They have access to every ESG source and data. They have substantial resources. They have knowledge, experience and clout. Together with the World Economic Forum they have unveiled on 22 September 2020 a paper proposing to harmonize ESG reporting standards. However, they fail to provide any data, any case study, any business model to back their proposal. Putting a table of metrics together is the easy part. The harder part is getting companies to agree, getting the data, independently validating the data (be in no doubt that if you don’t do this you expose yourself to serious risks – after all, there are also short sellers), getting banks to find them useful, getting clients to put their money.

This is a welcome first step, don’t get me wrong. ESG needs this to take-off and anything that starts the ball rolling is to be encouraged. But I believe a solid business case is necessary. When I developed the Bordier & Cie CSR system, I looked into more than 20 companies. It is reasonable to ask the Big Four accounting firms and the World Economic Forum to commit to providing 20 ESG evaluations of diverse types of corporations based on their harmonized metrics for IBC’s Winter Meeting in January 2021.

Supported By:

environmental corporate governance essay

Subscribe or Follow

Program on corporate governance advisory board.

  • William Ackman
  • Peter Atkins
  • Kerry E. Berchem
  • Richard Brand
  • Daniel Burch
  • Arthur B. Crozier
  • Renata J. Ferrari
  • John Finley
  • Carolyn Frantz
  • Andrew Freedman
  • Byron Georgiou
  • Joseph Hall
  • Jason M. Halper
  • David Millstone
  • Theodore Mirvis
  • Maria Moats
  • Erika Moore
  • Morton Pierce
  • Philip Richter
  • Marc Trevino
  • Steven J. Williams
  • Daniel Wolf

HLS Faculty & Senior Fellows

  • Lucian Bebchuk
  • Robert Clark
  • John Coates
  • Stephen M. Davis
  • Allen Ferrell
  • Jesse Fried
  • Oliver Hart
  • Howell Jackson
  • Kobi Kastiel
  • Reinier Kraakman
  • Mark Ramseyer
  • Robert Sitkoff
  • Holger Spamann
  • Leo E. Strine, Jr.
  • Guhan Subramanian
  • Roberto Tallarita

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • View all journals
  • My Account Login
  • Explore content
  • About the journal
  • Publish with us
  • Sign up for alerts
  • Review Article
  • Open access
  • Published: 13 July 2023

Integration of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criteria: their impacts on corporate sustainability performance

  • Anrafel de Souza Barbosa   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-3178-4149 1 ,
  • Maria Cristina Basilio Crispim da Silva 1 ,
  • Luiz Bueno da Silva 1 ,
  • Sandra Naomi Morioka 1 &
  • Vinícius Fernandes de Souza 2  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  10 , Article number:  410 ( 2023 ) Cite this article

21k Accesses

16 Citations

Metrics details

  • Business and management
  • Development studies
  • Environmental studies

In a corporate sustainability context, scholars have been studying internal and external relations provided by Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criteria, mostly from the organizational perspective. Therefore, the main objective of this paper is to map and analyze the literature on the impacts of integrating ESG criteria on corporate sustainability performance from different points of view. The methodology used followed the Preferred Report Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, corroborated by a critical analysis. The results indicate that the integration of ESG criteria, observed from different perspectives, strengthens corporate sustainability performance. They also revealed narrowing gaps in the literature regarding methodological analysis. Most of the papers in the analyzed sample use company-level data and employ regression analysis in their analysis. The present study concludes that companies, regardless of nationality, follow the guidelines of ESG criteria integration and such procedure brings several benefits. It points to the lack of more confirmatory research approaches from a workers’ perspective, as the interest remains in the economic-environmental realm from the organizations’ point of view. The absence of such evidence points to a gap in the literature that suggests the need for new study initiatives.

Similar content being viewed by others

environmental corporate governance essay

The carbon dioxide removal gap

environmental corporate governance essay

Frequent disturbances enhanced the resilience of past human populations

environmental corporate governance essay

Determinants of behaviour and their efficacy as targets of behavioural change interventions

Introduction.

The discussion surrounding the Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criteria and corporate sustainability has gained significant momentum in recent years, primarily driven by the evolving societal expectations regarding new models of production and consumption (Nishitani et al., 2021 ). Until the mid-1990s, according to Clarkson ( 1995 ), the focus of companies’ success was primarily centered on satisfying the needs of a single stakeholder, namely the shareholder. However, as time passed and the panorama shifted, particularly influenced by public policy changes, this perspective has undergone transformations. Gradually, other stakeholders have exerted pressure on companies, resulting in the integration of corporate sustainability into the strategic management of organizations, leading them to practice the ESG criteria (Wang et al., 2018 ).

Corporate sustainability performance refers to a company’s ability to operate in a manner that upholds ecological integrity, social well-being, and sound governance principles, while simultaneously generating value for its shareholders (Ahmad et al., 2023 ; Luque-Vílchez et al., 2023 ). It encompasses the effective management of environmental resources, fostering positive social relationships, and maintaining high standards of ethical conduct (Bellandi, 2023 ). The assessment of corporate sustainability performance requires the evaluation of both qualitative and quantitative indicators, examining various dimensions such as environmental stewardship, social responsibility, and corporate governance (Sandberg et al., 2022 ).

ESG criteria are used to assess corporate sustainability and ethical performance of companies and investments (Arora and Sharma, 2022 ). They are adopted by corporations to monitor and control the impacts of business activities on internal and external environments (Viranda et al., 2020 ). They mainly include: (i) collecting information; (ii) developing solutions; (iii) dealing with ESG issues in compliance with standards; (iv) conducting training; and (v) providing good communication (Boiral, 2002 ; Montabon et al., 2007 ; Merli and Preziosi, 2018 ). ESG criteria include prevention and preservation performance indicators (Gond et al., 2012 ). Besides, it requires coordination between the environmental department and other departments within companies, and balance between sustainable development goals and other corporate goals.

ESG criteria incorporates environmental, social, and governance factors into investment and business decision-making processes, and involves conditions relevant to traditional financial metrics when analyzing investments or valuing companies (Madden, 2022 ). These conditions can include metrics such as carbon emissions, water usage, employee diversity, labor practices, board diversity, executive compensation, etc. Thus, ESG criteria provide quantitative and qualitative information about a company’s sustainability practices and their potential impact on various stakeholders (Khalil et al., 2022 ; Uyar et al., 2023 ).

ESG integration involves incorporating environmental, social and governance indicators into investment and business decision-making processes. Instead of considering ESG criteria as separate from financial analysis, integration recognizes their materiality and incorporates them alongside traditional financial analysis. This integration can happen at various stages of the investment process, including portfolio construction, risk assessment, due diligence, and ongoing monitoring. Integration aims to identify and manage risks and opportunities related to ESG criteria, ultimately seeking to enhance long-term investment performance and sustainability (Gebhardt et al., 2022 ; Harasheh and Provasi, 2023 ).

ESG criteria provide the data and metrics to assess a company’s sustainability and ethical performance, while the integration involves incorporating these criteria into investment and business decision-making processes to better understand and manage the potential impacts on financial performance and corporate sustainability (Alda, 2021 ; Sahoo and Kumar, 2022 ).

In this sense, the integration of the ESG criteria has become an instrument responsible for defining, planning, operationalizing and executing the actions of corporations directed at environmental prevention and preservation, in addition to social responsibility and the quality performance of their activities (Barbosa et al., 2021 ).

Both from the standpoint of Sustainable Development Goals and the company response to shifting consumer preferences, interest in corporate sustainability has been increasing importance (Boulhaga et al., 2022 ). When looking for the relationship between the implementation of the ESG criteria and the corporate sustainability, the literature presents a heterogeneous scenario. Some researchers advocate a positive relationship (Harymawan et al., 2022 ; Kim et al., 2022 ), and others have confirmed a negative relationship (Rajesh and Rajendran, 2020 ).

As is the case with research by Lee and Isa ( 2022 ), they find a positive relationship between the implementation of ESG criteria and financial performance, suggesting that ESG criteria can increase company value. In addition, the authors also find evidence that the disclosure of ESG criteria can improve the relationship with corporate sustainability performance. Already in the study by Xu et al. ( 2022 ), the heterogeneity analysis demonstrates that the negative relationship between ESG disclosure and the risk of falling stock prices is more significant in state-owned companies, companies with higher agency costs and in companies in the development phase.

Although the results are ambiguous, there are several positive examples of the relationship between the ESG criteria and the corporate sustainability, which influences the reasons why research on sustainable business models has been carried out and why organizations are changing their business model in the direction of sustainability. Additionally, there is a lot of pressure to consider ESG factors when making decisions, particularly from capital investors and financial institutions (Jonsdottir et al., 2022 ; Park and Oh, 2022 ).

Organizations responding to the pressure to implement ESG criteria must manage environmental, social, and economic risks (Triple Bottom Line) and understand their short, medium, and long-term impacts (Bravi et al., 2020 ). To this end, many companies adopt management systems related to ESG criteria to integrate elements of the Triple Bottom Line, address stakeholder needs, and mitigate risks (Esquer-Peralta et al., 2008 ).

Thus, the ESG criteria cannot be seen only as a cost, since they can bring benefits to the company and be a competitive advantage over competitors (Barbosa et al., 2023 ; Zhang et al., 2021 ).

That said, the need for an innovative and coherent research field focused on ESG issues increases as environmental, social, and governance problems intensifies (Vanderley, 2020 ).

The literature has already discussed the research situation, qualitatively and quantitatively, regarding ESG criteria through the prism of corporations, usually in the context of trying to improve the field’s problem-solving ability in relation to companies’ concerns and practices. Baumgartner and Rauter’s ( 2017 ) research addresses the strategic perspectives of corporate sustainability management to develop sustainable organizations and promote the integration of ESG criteria into business activities and techniques.

This narrow interpretation is criticized by several scholars as being insufficiently analytical, as well as lacking a rigorous appreciation of the historical basis of human-environment interaction, highlighting worker perception (Bryant and Wilson, 1998 ; Herghiligiu et al., 2019 ).

Existing research on ESG criteria primarily focuses on the corporate perspective (Bourcet, 2020 ; Khanchel et al., 2023 ; Tsang et al., 2023 ). However, this literature review did not identify any references that support the worker’s perspective or address their involvement in organizational management, as highlighted by Ouni et al. ( 2020 ).

Therefore, this study aims to map and analyze the literature on the impacts of integrating ESG criteria on corporate sustainability performance through different points of view. The research will employ both qualitative and quantitative analysis and consider the viewpoints of both employers and employees. This study aims to fill the existing gap in the literature, as no significant research has yet converged in this direction.

As is the case with the research of Huang ( 2021 ), who conducted a systematic literature review (SLR) to examine the link between ESG activities and organizational financial performance, focusing on the institutional aspect. Similarly, Taliento et al. ( 2019 ), who investigated the impact of ESG factors on economic performance, emphasizing the corporate sustainability advantage and business understanding.

This research holds significance due to the growing global efforts to establish ESG criteria and mitigate environmental, social, and economic risks (Triple Bottom Line) for sustainable development. It aims to comprehend how these risks can affect sustainable development in the short, medium, and long-term, considering both organizational and collaborative perspectives (workers) (Bravi et al., 2020 ).

In this sense, the main objective of this paper is to map and analyze the literature on the impacts of integrating ESG criteria on corporate sustainability performance through different points of view. To achieve the proposed objective, the investigation addressed the following research questions:

What are the main features of the literature on ESG criteria?

What are the main methodological approaches used to study ESG criteria impact on corporate sustainability?

What are the main impacts of integrating ESG criteria on corporate sustainability performance observed in the literature?

This paper is divided into six sections, including this introduction (section 1). Section “Theoretical backgrounds: Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criteria” refers to the theoretical foundation on the ESG criteria and the construction of the research hypotheses. Subsequently, in section “Methodological procedures”, the methodological procedures of the research are discussed. In section “Results”, the results are developed. Then, in section “Discussion”, a discussion is carried out. And, finally, in section “Conclusion”, the research conclusions are highlighted.

Theoretical backgrounds: Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criteria

The ESG criteria are about the set of organizational practices that considers in its context environmental, social, and governance factors, with a view to achieving long-term sustainability (Sultana et al., 2018 ). The proportionality of these three aspects in business management has the purpose of analyzing the operations in a holistic way, not limited merely to the economic and financial aspects (Cek and Eyupoglu, 2020 ). In this sense, the economic, transparency and ethical precepts are articulated, seeking to ensure the competitiveness and the perdurability of a company. (Oncioiu et al., 2020 ).

The environmental dimension involves assessing the corporation’s carbon footprint, natural resource usage (energy consumption and efficiency), recycling policies, waste management, and efforts to minimize environmental impacts (Rajesh, 2020 ). The social dimension encompasses the company’s relationships with employees, suppliers, partners, clients, and communities. It includes promoting diversity, non-discrimination, gender pay equality, equal opportunities, employee education, and community protection (Li and Wu, 2020 ). The governance dimension focuses on leadership, internal controls, executive compensation, audits, shareholder rights, anti-corruption policies, and transparency and accountability practices (Cek and Eyupoglu, 2020 ).

ESG criteria, also known as sustainable or socially responsible investments, assist investors in assessing companies’ initiatives and commitment to environmental, social, and governance issues. These criteria can be applied internally or externally in a company’s management (Du Rietz, 2018 ).

That said, compliance with ESG policies and practices is increasingly important to investors, employees, and customers, shaping company perception and performance evaluation beyond financial measures (Beretta et al., 2019 ).

While ESG indicators may vary by region, market, and industry, there are emerging best practices in the corporate world (Khalid et al., 2021 ). Thus, an example of ESG practices can be observed through the Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI), created by initiative of investors in partnership with the United Nations Environment Program Finance Initiative (UNEP FI) and the UN Global Compact, with the aim of guiding the market in the pursuit of responsible development (Bauckloh et al., 2021 ; Naffa and Fain, 2020 ).

Therefore, one way to find out whether a particular organization is sustainable is to evaluate its performance by ESG indexes. However, these indexes have limitations as they may not capture the multidimensional aspects of ESG criteria comprehensively. Consequently, a broader focus on ESG criteria is needed, considering corporate sustainability performance.

Methodological procedures

There are distinct alternatives that can be appreciated in the deployment of a SLR, comprising a bibliometric approach, meta-analysis (Hunter et al., 1986 ) and content analysis approaches. (White and McCain, 1998 ). These three techniques were applied in the present study. The scope of this study provides qualitative and quantitative analysis of publications, in the synthesis and assimilation of the most explored academic research and authors with the support of citation analysis, as well as in the critical analysis of the sample of articles collected.

To address the research aims, which is to map and analyze the literature on the impacts on corporate sustainability performance provided by the integration of ESG criteria, this study relied on two procedures. The first procedure was a consistent and robust SLR materialized according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) methodology, which blends reference analysis, network analysis, and content analysis. The second method was a critical in-depth analysis of a specific sample of articles collected through the PRISMA structured procedure, which integrated and supported the initial technique, as already used in the sustainability literature (Bolis et al., 2014 ).

Primary procedure: PRISMA methodology

The PRISMA methodology is a directive that aims to provide scholars to improve the peculiarity of the externalization of research information, as well as to guide in the critical conjecture of a review of articles already published (Page et al., 2021 ).

Eligibility and ineligibility criteria

The documents eligible for the sample of this research were those published in the last 5 years (period from 2017 to March 2022); belonging to the study domain of environmental, social and governance areas (research area); considered exclusively as research articles (document type); disseminated only in scientific journals (journals ); written only in English language (language); and intrinsic to the topic of this research. The ineligible studies were those without a well-defined scientific structure, those without relevant data implicated in the theme of this research, those without access to the text ( in press ), and those that did not propose quantitative analysis (as this is a relevant point for future research).

Selection of the scientific databases

As a basis for this SLR and starting to answer the questions listed to achieve the objective of this study, the initial sample of articles followed systematic strategies that were adopted to consult the bibliometric databases until March 2022. Three scientific knowledge bases, Scopus , Web of Science ( WoS ), and Science Direct ( SD ) were used in to identify studies related to the ESG criteria.

The level of quality, the number of publications, the area of knowledge, and the set of metadata essential for the analysis of the references (including titles, abstracts, keywords, year of publication, number of citations, list of authors, countries, among others) were the criteria of choice for these 3 scientific databases. Scopus is one of the largest scientific knowledge bases of peer-reviewed literature (Morioka and de Carvalho, 2016 ). WoS can cover all indexed journals with an impact factor calculated in JCR ( Journal Citation Report ) (Carvalho et al., 2013 ). And SD combines reliable full-text publications in the scientific, technical and health fields (Direct, 2020 ). Another factor also considered was that all 3 databases provide metadata compatible with Mendeley reference analysis software (Carvalho et al., 2013 ).

Sampling procedure

The sampling procedure used to screen the articles was search by search terms, which were adapted for each defined bibliographic database. This was performed in March 2022. The keyword terms for the investigation were applied as follows: ("Environmental, Social, and Governance") AND (Impact* OR Effect* OR Performanc* OR Integrat*) AND (Sustainab*).

The initial searches are shown in Table 1 .

The first triage was applied as " Article title, Abstract, Keywords " in Scopus , as " Topic " in WoS and as " Title, abstract or author-specified keywords " in SD resulting in 5,760 collected documents ("Initial Sample"). Then, the primary parameter for refining the references was run as " Publication Years ", reducing the number of records by 1,152 documents. The secondary elimination criterion was applied as " Topic Area ", synthesizing the sample into 580 searches.

Continuing with the exclusion process, the third suppression factor was submitted as " Document Type ", summarizing the records into 486 studies. Subsequently, "Source Type" was used as the fourth parameter of reference reduction, reducing the records by 3 documents. Subsequently, the penultimate refinement requirement was performed as " Language ", subtracting 9 more references. Finally, the reading of the titles and abstracts of the articles was used as the sixth ground for the refinement of the sample as " Off Topic ", restricting to 3,172 documents that did not directly address the topic of this study. Thus, the quantity of rejected documents was 5,402 references, resulting in a sample of 358 research articles selected from the 3 scientific databases.

The references were then entered into Mendeley software to verify the intersections of studies between the databases. The triage identified 229 duplicate documents, which were excluded, reducing the sample to 129 articles. Subsequently, an isolated analysis of each of the 129 selected publications was performed to assess compatibility with the eligibility and ineligibility criteria focusing on the adequacy to the research premises and quality parameters related to the methodological peculiarity of the publications. This analysis resulted in an exclusion of 82 studies. The "Remaining Sample" became 47 research articles.

After rejecting studies that did not satisfy the "Initial Sample" pre-selection process, that were in duplicate, and that did not have the eligibility criteria, the snowball method was applied (Yin et al., 2020 ). The references were expanded to incorporate other studies that were cited in the 47 articles in the "Remaining Sample". The total number of records selected through the snowball technique was 2 studies ("Additional Sample"). The inclusion of the additional articles followed the same eligibility (except for the year of publication) and ineligibility criteria cited in section “Eligibility and ineligibility criteria”. Thus, the "Final Sample" for the conduct of this SLR was 49 research articles.

Reference analysis

Data tabulation and grouping strategies directed the stratification of information and a narrative synopsis. A spreadsheet ( Microsoft Excel 2021) and Mendeley software were used to manage the selected articles to transcribe predominant methodological minutiae of each research study comprising the assessment instrument used, the setting, participants, and substantive findings in terms of validity and credibility. The number of publications summarized by year and journal was the initial parameter of the reference analysis process. This resource made it possible to see how the records succeeded over the years and to discriminate the journals that repeatedly dealt with the theme of this research.

Network analysis

In this step, with the assistance of the VOSviewer software , the network analysis was performed, considering the compatibility of keywords and authors were analyzed through clustering diagrams. The first citation network developed was that of most relevant keywords. The second network developed was that of co-citations, which shows the degree of equivalence between the references presenting the articles mentioned together. The analysis of this network can help assimilate the intellectual character of a field and map the thematic similarities of scholars and the aspect of how groups of researchers relate to each other (Pilkington and Liston-Heyes, 1999 ).

Another analysis performed was on the methodological approaches applied among the studies. For this diagnosis, a deductive multivariate approach was applied based on the theoretical foundation and knowledge from the references. This analysis used insights extracted from the keywords and the analysis of important topics.

Content analysis

Each article included in the final sample was specifically cataloged using Mendeley software that comprised the metadata generated by scientific databases. For the content analysis, the articles were classified in order to consider the tools applied, the scope of application, the relevant industries, the research objectives, and the advantages and limitations of the process required to obtain the research results.

Secondary procedure: critical (interpretative) analysis

Critical analysis is a research skill outlined to contribute to the interpretation of complex issues to understand specific conjunctures (Gil-Guirado et al., 2021 ). Critical analysis involves multiple iterative cycles of interpreting and perceiving the content of parts of the phenomena of interest, and this assimilation of the parts entails a better understanding of the contexts as a whole (Valor et al., 2018 ).

To deepen the assimilation of the contexts, each researcher involved forms an understanding of their perspective in continuous cycles until a "cognitive fusion" is achieved resulting in a better conception of the phenomena. This approach does not aim to construct a theory, but rather to infer a better understanding of the contexts (Bolis et al., 2014 ). Thus, to complement the answers to the questions of this research, critical analysis was applied, which involved dialectical reasoning cycles to identify the understanding (systematization of applicable processes to determine the meaning and scope of methodologies) of researchers on the impacts of integrating ESG criteria on corporate sustainability performance with the aim of finding the "cognitive fusion".

The initial cycle demanded a series of reviews, syntheses, and interpretations of the sample of articles collected in the structured procedure (PRISMA). In the next cycle, the collaborative critical process was adhered to, resulting in the refinement of the main methodological characteristics fragmented by each ESG criterion. Later, in the final interpretive cycle, the procedures of the first two cycles were analyzed, which provided additional perspectives and insights that complemented the previous interpretations.

Risk of bias

To assess the methodological quality of the included articles, the Prediction Study Trend Risk Assessment Tool (PROBAST) was used. (Wolff et al., 2019 ). This tool includes 20 questions divided into four domains (participants, predictors, outcome, and analysis). The risk of bias for each domain was rated as low risk, high risk, or very unclear to judgment (Wolff et al., 2019 ). Two researchers of the present study independently assessed the risk of bias of the included articles and performed an evaluation by qualitative analysis. Disagreements were resolved by consensus with a third reviewer.

The document collection strategy yielded 129 records, and after screening titles and abstracts and applying eligibility and ineligibility criteria, 49 articles were selected for this systematic literature review (SLR). Please refer to Fig. 1 for the SLR flow diagram.

figure 1

Source: Adapted from Page et al. ( 2021 ).

Consistent with Nishitani et al.’s ( 2021 ) assertion, Fig. 2 demonstrates the contemporary nature of discussions on ESG criteria and corporate sustainability, indicating their recent consolidation. In this specific context, the eligibility and ineligibility criteria of the articles were disregarded, and only a keyword search for "Environmental, Social, and Governance" was conducted across three databases. This was solely done to quantify the research related to the theme.

figure 2

Source: Scopus , WoS , and SD .

It is evident that there has been an increasing number of studies focused on ESG criteria over the years, with a peak of 649 research articles in 2021 (an average of 54 articles per month). This trend aligns with the growing interest of organizations in implementing ESG criteria (Qureshi et al., 2021 ).

Literature overview

Starting to answer the first research question ( What are the main characteristics of the literature on ESG criteria? ), an overview of the literature was conducted based on descriptive statistics of the sample of 49 selected articles. Table 2 presents the most influential studies. It lists the publications with 20 or more citations in the Scopus database.

The study that stood out the most was that of Xie et al. ( 2019 ), which investigates whether environmental, social, and governance activities improve corporate financial performance, with 115 citations over 3 years, an average of 38 citations/year; followed by the respective research of Garcia et al. ( 2017 ), which highlights the sensitive emerging market sectors in relation to improved ESG performance, published in the year 2017 and has 104 citations; and by Qureshi et al. ( 2020 ), which analyzes the moderating role of the impact of sustainability disclosure and board diversity on firm value, with 41 citations in 2 year, both averaging approximately 21 citations per year.

The articles of the core sample were designated from the network analysis of keywords, a quantitative technique practiced to identify the repercussion and expressiveness of an author or an article (Garfield and Morman, 1981 ). Nevertheless, this methodology should also take into account the relevance of the journal, besides computing the average annual citation (Carvalho et al., 2013 ), as shown in Table 2 .

That said, Fig. 3 shows, through the network analysis of the VOSviewer software , the relationship between the keywords and the articles in the designated sample, with recurrences of at least 2 times (this implies that terms that appear only once were not displayed). Other points to be observed are that the more consistent (full-bodied) the meshes the stronger the connections and the larger the points (nodes) of connections the more relevance they have.

figure 3

Source: Scopus, WoS , and SD .

Network analysis enables a better explanation of the consonance between the terms discovered, as well as simplifying the differentiation between the groupings literally associated with its operating principles.

There were 4 sets of keywords identified. Of the 4 sets of the keyword network analysis, 3 contain the term " ESG " and its variations. In the case of the terms " sustainability and performance ", all 4 clusters register their presence. This demonstrates that the search terms adopted were assertive, since it can be seen that they adhere to the proposed theme.

The research by Zhang et al. ( 2020 ), which discusses how ESG initiatives affect innovation performance for corporate sustainability; and the research of Xu et al. ( 2021 ), which examines the impacts of research and development (R&D) investment and ESG performance on green innovation performance; ratify the cited adherence.

Research topics: the main methodologies

The predominant impacts addressed in the sample of 49 scientific studies collected, classified by level of analysis and methodological interpellation, are evidenced in Table 3 , which already awakens the dissolution to the second research question ( What are the main methodological approaches used to study ESG criteria impact on corporate sustainability? ).

A content analysis of the full texts of the articles selected for this SLR was performed and it was found that approximately 87.75% of the studies (43 references) were conducted using information from companies through databases. Analyzes were quantitative, 46 studies, approximately 93.87%, applied regression analysis. Of these, 6 investigations, approximately 13.04%, implemented structural equation modeling. These results, corroborate the conjuncture that there is no evidence in the literature regarding research allusive to a mapping and quantitative analysis of the impacts of the integration of ESG criteria on corporate sustainability performance, from an employee’s perspective.

By Fig. 4 , it can be distinguished that the organizations’ commitment does not focus exclusively on financial performance (12 studies), but also prioritizes corporate sustainability (12 studies).

figure 4

Financial performance and corporate sustainability were investigated in approximately 49% of the research (24 records), proving corporate concern for both sustainable development and economic performance. Landi et al. ( 2022 ), highlight this awareness in their investigation of the incorporation of sustainability into risk management and the impacts on financial performance. Taken together, these practices have the potential to minimize cost and risk, enhance the company’s reputation and legitimacy, intensify innovation, and solidify growth paths and trajectories, all of which are vitally important to stakeholder value creation. (Ting et al., 2020 ).

The corporate sustainability performance disclosed through the ESG criteria was investigated in an attempt to demonstrate the quality of an organization, because through environmental, social, and governance analysis, it is possible to determine how the company positions itself in relation to society and the planet, in addition to offering more transparency to the investor (Mohammad and Wasiuzzaman, 2021 ).

Figure 5 displays a broad view of the amount of research performed around the world according to the sample of articles selected for this SLR.

figure 5

It can be seen that Europe stands out in the evolution of ESG criteria with approximately 32.65% of research, with the highest visibility for Italy and Spain. The research by Conca et al. ( 2021 ), on the impacts of ESG reports in European agri-food companies; and (Baraibar-Diez and Odriozola, 2019 ), related to the effects of ESG parameters on the social responsibility committees of European corporations, highlight the aforementioned evolutionary prominence.

Figure 6 displays the most often consulted databases to collect information about the ESG criteria of the listed companies for their corporate sustainability performance.

figure 6

Source: Table 3 .

Thomson Reuters and Bloomberg databases stand out because they are providers of reliable answers that help organizations make confident decisions and better manage business (Alsayegh et al., 2020 ). This reinforces the fact that most studies use publicly available data to measure ESG, whether than collect the ESG criteria for the companies under investigation.

Critical analysis

Critical analysis is a method of study for understanding difficult and complex situations, especially when interpretations of the same articulation are possible and competing. It is a form of text analysis and has been handled to discover their original meanings and how they are interpreted (Shephard et al., 2019 ).

Thus, complementing the results of the primary approach (PRISMA method), a critical analysis was implemented based on the selection of 49 articles considered for discussion. The aim was to answer the third question of this research ( What are the main impacts of integrating ESG criteria on corporate sustainability performance observed in the literature? ). Table 4 shows the main perceptions of the fragmented research according to each of the ESG criteria.

The cycles of the critical analysis involved a series of reviews, syntheses, and interpretations of ESG criteria affecting corporate sustainability performance identified in the 49 selected articles corroborating the structured process of this SLR. The results are shown in Tables 3 and 4 , which summarize the focus of the research, the methodologies applied, and the main gaps, contributions, and limitations of the studies.

In this SLR, the need for future empirical studies was also identified. There are still several research questions that need to be answered in depth. Some propositions for future investigations and possible research questions are outlined in Table 5 .

Analyzing the risk of bias in scientific research is of paramount importance as it can significantly impact the validity and reliability of research findings. It helps ensure that research outcomes accurately reflect reality and can be trusted by other researchers, policymakers, and the public (McGuinness and Higgins, 2021 ). Reproducibility is a fundamental principle of scientific research and transparently analyzing bias allows researchers to identify potential pitfalls and enhance the reproducibility of their work. Ethical considerations are also important as biased research can lead to harm, perpetuate discrimination, or favor specific individuals or groups unjustly (Marshall et al., 2015 ). Analyzing bias helps to improve the quality of evidence available for decision-making processes and ensures that the scientific literature remains reliable, allowing researchers to build upon a solid foundation of unbiased evidence. By carefully evaluating and addressing bias, researchers can enhance the quality and impact of their work (Reveiz et al., 2015 ; Wang et al., 2022 ).

In accordance with Table 6 (PROBAST diagnostics), most (93.9%) of the included research evidenced a minimal risk of bias and a low concern for applicability. The participants were the companies selected in each study; the predictors were the variables measured; the results were verified by the mathematical models; and the analysis, encompass the techniques used. The quality of the studies included in this study was rated from satisfactory to excellent.

Drawing upon rigorous research, this paper elucidates the prominent features that have appeared from the examination of ESG criteria. Table 2 and Fig. 3 show the repercussion, expressiveness and relevance of studies, authors, and journals.

The content analysis highlighted in Table 3 found that the literature on ESG criteria were carried out with information from companies through databases and applied regression analysis. These findings support the idea that there is no evidence in the study literature that maps or quantifies the effects of incorporating ESG criteria on corporate sustainability performance from the viewpoint of employees.

Ouni et al. ( 2020 ), in their study on the mediating role of ESG strands in relation to executive board gender diversity and corporate financial performance, highlighted the need for future research that focuses not only on organizational understanding, but especially on the perception of women (workers) themselves, as board members, of their role and their contribution to financial performance, which strengthens the gap characterized in this SLR.

Researchers employ various methodologies to study ESG criteria, allowing for nuanced insights and robust analysis (see Table 3 ). Quantitative studies utilize large-scale data sets, statistical models, and financial indicators to explore the relationship between ESG criteria and financial performance, risk management, and firm valuation (Alkaraan et al., 2022 ; Mavlutova et al., 2022 ). Qualitative research methods employ interviews, case studies, and content analysis to investigate the organizational processes, stakeholder perceptions, and contextual factors that influence ESG practices and outcomes (Petavratzi et al., 2022 ). Some studies adopt an integrated approach by combining quantitative and qualitative methods to gain a comprehensive understanding of the multifaceted nature of ESG criteria. These integrated approaches contribute to a holistic understanding of ESG-related phenomena (Aldowaish et al., 2022 ; Rehman et al., 2021 ).

Recognizing the strengths and limitations of methodologies, researchers have increasingly adopted mixed-methods approaches to investigate the impact of ESG criteria on corporate sustainability, integrating data collection and analysis processes to provide a comprehensive understanding of the research problem (Gebhardt et al., 2022 ). This approach allows researchers to triangulate findings, validate results, and gain a more nuanced perspective on the relationship between ESG criteria and corporate sustainability (Harasheh and Provasi, 2023 ). By leveraging the strengths of methodologies, research offers a more holistic and robust approach to studying complex phenomena.

The positive relationship of voluntary disclosure of corporate sustainability through the ESG criteria of organizations found in this study (see Table 4 ) provides evidence that the implementation of environmental and social strategies within an efficient system of corporate governance in the company strengthens the performance of corporate sustainability. The results also show that environmental performance and social performance are significantly positively related to sustainable economic performance, indicating that the corporation’s economic value and the creation of value for society are interdependent.

A similar fact was also found in the investigation of Zhang et al. ( 2020 ), on environmental, social and governance initiatives that affect innovative performance for corporate sustainability, which revealed that corporate governance initiatives play a moderating role in the relationship between environmental initiatives and performance innovation and the relationship between social initiatives and innovative performance.

Shaikh ( 2021 ), in his study on ESG practices and solid performance, explains the importance of voluntary reporting of non-financial indicators and a company’s responsibility towards stakeholders, reflected in the corporation’s accounting performance.

Integrating ESG criteria into business practices can have potential negative impacts, although specific effects may vary depending on context and implementation. As shown by the investigations of Wasiuzzaman et al. ( 2022 ), which verifies the extent to which culture can affect the relationship between ESG disclosure and company performance, evidencing the negative impact on the profitability of energy companies; and of Suttipun and Yordudom ( 2022 ), which analyzes the extent, level and trend of ESG disclosure in companies in Thailand, to test the different levels between high and low profile industries, which found a negative impact of governance disclosure on market reaction . Another example is the research of Yu et al. ( 2020 ), about Greenwashing in ESG disclosures, which identified organizations’ manipulations of ESG disclosures to increase market value.

While these concerns exist, effectively integrating ESG criteria can drive long-term value creation, risk management and stakeholder confidence. Implementing robust ESG practices requires careful consideration, transparency, and ongoing evaluation to mitigate potential negative impacts and ensure sustainable results.

The main objective of this article is to map and analyze the literature concerning the impacts of the integration of ESG criteria on corporate sustainability performance. To this end, an SLR was performed using the PRISMA methodology, with the intention of selecting the most relevant articles.

Figure 2 revealed an increase in the number of publications on ESG criteria. In 2017, there were only 97 published papers. Already in 2021, this number expanded to 649 manuscripts, an evolution of approximately 570%.

The references were systematically appraised using a hybrid approach that combined literature review methodologies, including structured and objective techniques such as bibliometric analysis, network analysis, and content analysis, to identify key highlights and gaps in the literature related to the theme of this investigation; as well as subjective text interpretation technique (critical analysis), to robust the structured analysis.

This study assisted in diagnosing the methodologies addressed and narrowing the gaps in the literature in four ways. Initially, the article presents a bibliometric analysis with a perspective on ESG criteria and sustainability performance based on the sampling of 49 research studies outlining the main papers and journals (according to Table 2 ). Subsequently, with the aid of network analysis the main keywords were highlighted (see Fig. 3 ).

Next, based on an in-depth content analysis, the article presents the main study highlights, the focus of the research, and the stratification of methods (Table 3 ). Finally, the critical analysis is juxtaposed to consolidate the initial structured analysis (Table 4 ).

Several authors have discussed the topic addressed by this SLR, such as Lokuwaduge and Heenetigala ( 2017 ), who made an interpellation of the integration of ESG precepts for an organizational sustainable development. Another reference is the paper by Bouslah et al. ( 2013 ), which analyzed the ESG dimensions and corporate risks.

But there is no evidence, to the knowledge of the authors of this paper, in the sample selected for this SLR, of research on a mapping and quantitative analysis of the impacts of integrating of ESG criteria on corporate sustainability performance as a result of workers’ perceptions. The study points out the lack of more confirmatory research approaches applying a multidimensional perspective of workers, as the interest remains in the economic-environmental perspective from the organizations’ point of view. It was also found that none of the studies listed made use of other types of diagnostic instruments diverging from the databases.

That said, the absence of such evidence highlights a gap in the literature that suggests the need for new study initiatives to fill it.

In addition to the opportunities for future studies proposed in Table 5 , future researches could explore the developing standardized metrics, common metrics that are relevant across different sectors and geographies; the relationship between ESG and financial performance, mechanisms behind this relationship, such as the impacts of ESG criteria on customer loyalty or employee satisfaction; the impacts of ESG criteria on non-financial stakeholders, such as employees, customers, and communities; the role of technology in ESG, such as artificial intelligence and blockchain in ESG reporting and decision-making; and on emerging ESG issues, such as the impact of climate change on supply chains or the ethical considerations of artificial intelligence.

Therefore, it would be important to establish standards and parameters that allow companies to understand and evaluate ESG criteria. In this sense, the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) could develop a global standardization on ESG that defines parameters, guidelines, and criteria with quality indicators, in line with the ISO 9001 standard already recognized worldwide.

This exploratory work highlights as a contribution the aspect of guiding corporations in understanding how the integration of ESG criteria can positively impact corporate sustainability performance, providing investment optimization and better business planning.

Furthermore, some important conclusions related to the ESG criteria can be obtained. It was observed that companies, regardless of nationality, follow the guidelines of ESG criteria integration and such procedure brings many benefits, such as: improving the organization’s image with stakeholders; increasing the corporation’s competitiveness; promoting corporate sustainability; improving the conjuncture in relation to gender diversity; improving intellectual opportunities; among others.

This research has limitations related to the use of keyword search engines and the filters of the selected databases. The keyword groups are asked to be elaborated in diverse ways, so the combinatorial analysis of the groupings may bring different answers. The filters of the scientific databases have disparate search characteristics, which may cause divergences in the answers. Another limitation was the critical analysis that may have generated an interpretation bias. Nevertheless, the PROBAST method and the systematic multi-method approach applied (bibliometric, network analysis, and content analysis) helped to mitigate this limitation.

Data availability

Data sharing is not applicable to this research as no data were generated or analyzed.

Aboud A, Diab A (2019) The financial and market consequences of environmental, social and governance ratings: the implications of recent political volatility in Egypt. Sustain Account Manag Policy J 10:498–520. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-06-2018-0167

Article   Google Scholar  

Ahmad H, Yaqub M, Lee SH (2023) Environmental-, social-, and governance-related factors for business investment and sustainability: a scientometric review of global trends. Environ Dev Sustain https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-023-02921-x

Alda M (2021) The environmental, social, and governance (ESG) dimension of firms in which social responsible investment (SRI) and conventional pension funds invest: The mainstream SRI and the ESG inclusion. J Clean Prod 298:126812. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126812

Aldowaish A, Kokuryo J, Almazyad O, Goi HC (2022) Environmental, social, and governance integration into the business model: literature review and research agenda. Sustain. 14. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14052959

Alkaraan F, Albitar K, Hussainey K, Venkatesh VG (2022) Corporate transformation toward Industry 4.0 and financial performance: the influence of environmental, social, and governance (ESG). Technol Forecast Soc Change 175:121423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121423

Alsayegh MF, Rahman RA, Homayoun S (2020) Corporate economic, environmental, and social sustainability performance transformation through ESG disclosure. Sustain 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093910

Arayssi M, Jizi M, Tabaja HH (2020) The impact of board composition on the level of ESG disclosures in GCC countries. Sustain Account Manag Policy J 11:137–161. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-05-2018-0136

Arif M, Sajjad A, Farooq S, Abrar M, Joyo AS (2020) The impact of audit committee attributes on the quality and quantity of environmental, social and governance (ESG) disclosures. Corp Gov 21:497–514. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-06-2020-0243

Arora A, Sharma D (2022) Do Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) Performance Scores Reduce the Cost of Debt? Evidence from Indian firms. Australas Account Bus Financ J 16:4–18. https://doi.org/10.14453/aabfj.v16i5.02

Atan R, Alam MM, Said J, Zamri M (2018) The impacts of environmental, social, and governance factors on firm Performance: panel study of Malaysian companies. Manag Environ Qual An Int J https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-03-2017-0033

Baraibar-Diez E, Odriozola MD (2019) CSR committees and their effect on ESG performance in UK, France, Germany, and Spain. Sustain. 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11185077

Baraibar-Diez E, Odriozola MD, Fernández Sánchez JL (2019) Sustainable compensation policies and its effect on environmental, social, and governance scores. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 26:1457–1472. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1760

Barbosa A de S, Bueno da Silva L, de Souza VF, Morioka SN(2021) Integrated management systems: their organizational impacts Total Qual Manag Bus Excell 33:794–817. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2021.1893685

Barbosa A de S, Bueno da Silva L, Morioka SN, da Silva JMN, de Souza VF (2023). Integrated management systems and organizational performance: a multidimensional perspective. Total Qual Manag Bus Excell 1–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2023.2181153

Bauckloh T, Schaltegger S, Utz S, Zeile S, Zwergel B (2021) Active first movers vs. late free-riders? An empirical analysis of UN PRI signatories’ commitment, J Bus Ethics https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-021-04992-0

Baumgartner RJ, Rauter R (2017) Strategic perspectives of corporate sustainability management to develop a sustainable organization. J Clean Prod 140:81–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.04.146

Bellandi F (2023) Equilibrating financially sustainable growth and environmental, social, and governance sustainable growth. Eur Manag Rev 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/emre.12554

Beretta V, Demartini C, Trucco S (2019) Does environmental, social and governance performance influence intellectual capital disclosure tone in integrated reporting. ? J Intellect Cap 20:100–124. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-02-2018-0049

Birindelli G, Dell’Atti S, Iannuzzi AP, Savioli M (2018) Composition and activity of the board of directors: Impact on ESG performance in the banking system. Sustain 10:1–20. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10124699

Bodhanwala S, Bodhanwala R (2018) Does corporate sustainability impact firm profitability? Evidence from India. Manag Decis 56:1734–1747. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-04-2017-0381

Boiral O (2002) Tacit knowledge and environmental management. Long Range Plann 35:291–317. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-6301(02)00047-X

Bolis I, Morioka SN, Sznelwar LI (2014) When sustainable development risks losing its meaning. Delimiting the concept with a comprehensive literature review and a conceptual model. J Clean Prod 83:7–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.06.041

Boulhaga M, Bouri A, Elamer AA, Ibrahim BA (2022) Environmental, social and governance ratings and firm performance: the moderating role of internal control quality. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2343

Bourcet C (2020) Empirical determinants of renewable energy deployment: a systematic literature review. Energy Econ 85:104563. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2019.104563

Bouslah K, Kryzanowski L, M’Zali B (2013) The impact of the dimensions of social performance on firm risk. J Bank Financ 37:1258–1273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2012.12.004

Bravi L, Santos G, Pagano A, Murmura F (2020) Environmental management system according to ISO 14001:2015 as a driver to sustainable development. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 27:2599–2614. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1985

Bravo F, Reguera-Alvarado N (2019) Sustainable development disclosure: environmental, social, and governance reporting and gender diversity in the audit committee. Bus Strateg Environ 28:418–429. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2258

Bryant RL, Wilson GA (1998) Rethinking environmental management. Prog Hum Geogr 22:321–343. https://doi.org/10.1191/030913298672031592

Carvalho MM, Fleury A, Lopes AP (2013) An overview of the literature on technology roadmapping (TRM): Contributions and trends. Technol Forecast Soc Change 80:1418–1437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2012.11.008

Cek K, Eyupoglu S (2020) Does environmental, social and governance performance influence economic performance? J Bus Econ Manag 21:1165–1184. https://doi.org/10.3846/jbem.2020.12725

Clarkson ME (1995) A Stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Acad Manag Rev 20:92–117. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9503271994

Conca L, Manta F, Morrone D, Toma P (2021) The impact of direct environmental, social, and governance reporting: empirical evidence in European-listed companies in the agri-food sector. Bus Strateg Environ 30:1080–1093. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2672

De Masi S, Słomka-Gołębiowska A, Becagli C, Paci A (2021) Toward sustainable corporate behavior: the effect of the critical mass of female directors on environmental, social, and governance disclosure. Bus Strateg Environ 30:1865–1878. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2721

Direct S (2020) Science direct advertisement. Clin Microbiol News 42:201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinmicnews.2020.12.002

Du Rietz S (2018) Information vs knowledge: corporate accountability in environmental, social, and governance issues. Account Audit Account J 31:586–607. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-01-2013-1198

Esquer-Peralta J, Velazquez L, Munguia N (2008) Perceptions of core elements for sustainability management systems (SMS). Manag Decis 46:1027–1038. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740810890195

Gangi F, Daniele LM, Varrone N, Vicentini F, Coscia M (2021) Equity mutual funds’ interest in the environmental, social and governance policies of target firms: does gender diversity in management teams matter? Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag. 28:1018–1031. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2102

Garcia AS, Mendes-Da-Silva W, Orsato R (2017) Sensitive industries produce better ESG performance: evidence from emerging markets. J Clean Prod 150:135–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.02.180

Garcia AS, Orsato RJ (2020) Testing the institutional difference hypothesis: a study about environmental, social, governance, and financial performance. Bus Strateg Environ 29:3261–3272. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2570

Garfield E, Morman ET (1981) Citation indexing: its theory and application in science, technology, and humanities. Isis. https://doi.org/10.1086/352799

Gebhardt M, Thun TW, Seefloth M, Zülch H (2022) Managing sustainability—does the integration of environmental, social and governance key performance indicators in the internal management systems contribute to companies’ environmental, social and governance performance? Bus Strateg Environ 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3242

Gil-Guirado S, Cantos JO, Pérez-Morales A, Barriendos M (2021) The risk is in the detail: Historical cartography and a hermeneutic analysis of historical floods in the city of murcia. Geogr Res Lett 47:183–219. https://doi.org/10.18172/cig.4863

Gond JP, Grubnic S, Herzig C, Moon J (2012) Configuring management control systems: theorizing the integration of strategy and sustainability. Manag Account Res 23:205–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2012.06.003

Harasheh M, Provasi R (2023) A need for assurance: do internal control systems integrate environmental, social, and governance factors? Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 30:384–401. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2361

Harymawan I, Nasih M, Agustia D, Putra FKG, Djajadikerta HG (2022) Investment efficiency and environmental, social, and governance reporting: Perspective from corporate integration management. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 29:1186–1202. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2263

He R, Chen X, Chen C, Zhai J, Cui L (2021) Environmental, social, and governance incidents and bank loan contracts. Sustain 13:1–19. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13041885

Herghiligiu IV, Robu IB, Pislaru M, Vilcu A, Asandului AL, Avasilcai S, Balan C (2019) Sustainable environmental management system integration and business performance: a balance assessment approach using fuzzy logic. Sustain. 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11195311

Huang DZX (2021) Environmental, social and governance (ESG) activity and firm performance: a review and consolidation. Account Financ 61:335–360. https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.12569

Hunter JE, Schmidt FL, Jackson GB (1986) Meta-analysis: cumulating research findings across studies. Educ Res 15:20–21. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X015008020

Jonsdottir B, Sigurjonsson TO, Johannsdottir L, Wendt S (2022) Barriers to using ESG data for investment decisions. Sustain 14:1–14. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14095157

Khalid F, Sun J, Huang G, Su CY (2021) Environmental, social and governance performance of chinese multinationals: a comparison of state-and non-state-owned enterprises. Sustain. 13. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13074020

Khalil MA, Khalil R, Khalil MK (2022) Environmental, social and governance (ESG)—augmented investments in innovation and firms’ value: a fixed-effects panel regression of Asian economies. China Financ Rev Int https://doi.org/10.1108/CFRI-05-2022-0067

Khanchel I, Lassoued N, Baccar I (2023) Sustainability and firm performance: the role of environmental, social and governance disclosure and green innovation. Manag Decis https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-09-2021-1252

Kim J, Cho E, Okafor CE, Choi D (2022) Does environmental, social, and governance drive the sustainability of multinational corporation’s subsidiaries? Evidence from Korea. Front Psychol 13:1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.899936

Koroleva E, Baggieri M, Nalwanga S (2020) Company performance: are environmental, social, and governance factors important? Int J Technol 11:1468–1477. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v11i8.4527

Kuo TC, Chen HM, Meng HM (2021) Do corporate social responsibility practices improve financial performance? A case study of airline companies. J. Clean. Prod. 310:127380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127380

Landi GC, Iandolo F, Renzi A, Rey A (2022) Embedding sustainability in risk management: The impact of environmental, social, and governance ratings on corporate financial risk. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2256

Lee S-P, Isa M (2022) Environmental, social and governance (ESG) practices and financial performance of Shariah-compliant companies in Malaysia. J Islam Account Bus Res https://doi.org/10.1108/JIABR-06-2020-0183

Li J, Wu D (2020) Do corporate social responsibility engagements lead to real environmental, social, and governance impact? Manage Sci 66:2564–2588. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2019.3324

Lokuwaduge CSDS, Heenetigala K (2017) Integrating environmental, social and governance (ESG) disclosure for a sustainable development: an Australian study. Bus Strateg Environ 26:438–450. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.1927

López-Toro A, Sánchez-Teba EM, Benítez-Márquez MD, Rodríguez-Fernández M (2021) Influence of ESGC indicators on financial performance of listed pharmaceutical companies alberto. Int J Environ Res Public Health 18. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18094556

Luque-Vílchez M, Gómez-Limón JA, Guerrero-Baena MD, Rodríguez-Gutiérrez P (2023) Deconstructing corporate environmental, social, and governance performance: heterogeneous stakeholder preferences in the food industry. Sustain Dev 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2488

Madden BJ (2022) Bet on innovation, not environmental, social and governance metrics, to lead the Net Zero transition. Syst Res Behav Sci 417–428. https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2915

Marshall IJ, Kuiper J, Wallace BC (2015) Automating risk of bias assessment for clinical trials. IEEE J Biomed Heal Informatics 19:1406–1412. https://doi.org/10.1109/JBHI.2015.2431314

Mavlutova I, Fomins A, Spilbergs A, Atstaja D, Brizga J (2022) Opportunities to increase financial well-being by investing in environmental, social and governance with respect to improving financial literacy under covid-19: the case of Latvia. Sustain. 14. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14010339

McGuinness LA, Higgins JPT (2021) Risk-of-bias VISualization (robvis): an R package and Shiny web app for visualizing risk-of-bias assessments. Res Synth Methods 12:55–61. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1411

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Merli R, Preziosi M (2018) The EMAS impasse: factors influencing Italian organizations to withdraw or renew the registration. J Clean Prod 172:4532–4543. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.031

Minutolo MC, Kristjanpoller WD, Stakeley J (2019) Exploring environmental, social, and governance disclosure effects on the S&P 500 financial performance. Bus Strateg Environ 28:1083–1095. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2303

Miralles-Quirós MM, Miralles-Quirós JL, Redondo-Hernández J (2019) The impact of environmental, social, and governance performance on stock prices: evidence from the banking industry. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 26:1446–1456. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1759

Mohammad WMW, Wasiuzzaman S (2021) Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) disclosure, competitive advantage and performance of firms in Malaysia. Clean Environ Syst 2:100015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cesys.2021.100015

Moneva JM, Bonilla-Priego MJ, Ortas E (2020) Corporate social responsibility and organisational performance in the tourism sector. J Sustain Tour 28:853–872. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2019.1707838

Montabon F, Sroufe R, Narasimhan R (2007) An examination of corporate reporting, environmental management practices and firm performance. J Oper Manag 25:998–1014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2006.10.003

Morioka SN, de Carvalho MM (2016) A systematic literature review towards a conceptual framework for integrating sustainability performance into business. J Clean Prod 136:134–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.01.104

Naffa H, Fain M (2020) Performance measurement of ESG-themed megatrend investments in global equity markets using pure factor portfolios methodology, PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0244225

Ng TH, Lye CT, Chan KH, Lim YZ, Lim YS (2020) Sustainability in Asia: the roles of financial development in environmental, social and governance (ESG) performance. Soc Indic Res 150:17–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-020-02288-w

Nishitani K, Nguyen TBH, Trinh TQ, Wu Q, Kokubu K (2021) Are corporate environmental activities to meet sustainable development goals (SDGs) simply greenwashing? An empirical study of environmental management control systems in Vietnamese companies from the stakeholder management perspective. J Environ Manage 296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113364

Nitescu DC, Cristea MA (2020) Environmental, social and governance risks-New challenges for the banking business sustainability. Amfiteatru Econ 22:692–706. https://doi.org/10.24818/EA/2020/55/692

Oncioiu I, Popescu DM, Aviana AE, Şerban A, Rotaru F, Petrescu M, Marin-Pantelescu A (2020) The role of environmental, social, and governance disclosure in financial transparency. Sustain 12:1–16. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU12176757

Ortas E, Gallego-Álvarez I, Álvarez I (2019) National institutions, stakeholder engagement, and firms’ environmental, social, and governance performance. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 26:598–611. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1706

Ouni Z, Mansour JB, Arfaoui S (2020) Board/executive gender diversity and firm financial performance in Canada: the mediating role of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) orientation. Sustain 12:1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12208386

Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, Shamseer L, Tetzlaff JM, Akl EA, Brennan SE, Chou R, Glanville J, Grimshaw JM, Hróbjartsson A, Lalu MM, Li T, Loder EW, Mayo-Wilson E, McDonald S, McGuinness LA, Stewart LA, Thomas J, Tricco AC, Welch VA, Whiting P, Moher D (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 372. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71

Park SR, Oh KS (2022) Integration of ESG information into individual investors’ corporate investment decisions: utilizing the UTAUT framework. Front Psychol 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.899480

Peng LS, Isa M (2020) Environmental, social and governance (Esg) practices and performance in shariah firms: agency or stakeholder theory? Asian Acad Manag J Account Financ 16:1–34. https://doi.org/10.21315/aamjaf2020.16.1.1

Petavratzi E, Sanchez-Lopez D, Hughes A, Stacey J, Ford J, Butcher A (2022) The impacts of environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues in achieving sustainable lithium supply in the Lithium Triangle. Miner Econ 35:673–699. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13563-022-00332-4

Pilkington A, Liston-Heyes C (1999) Is production and operations management a discipline? A citation/co-citation study. Int J Oper Prod Manag 19:7–20. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443579910244188

Pirtea MG, Noja GG, Cristea M, Panait M (2021) Interplay between environmental, social and governance coordinates and the financial performance of agricultural companies. Agric Econ (Czech Republic) 67:479–490. https://doi.org/10.17221/286/2021-AGRICECON

Qureshi MA, Akbar M, Akbar A, Poulova P (2021) Do ESG endeavors assist firms in achieving superior financial performance? A case of 100 best corporate citizens. SAGE Open 11. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211021598

Qureshi MA, Kirkerud S, Theresa K, Ahsan T (2020) The impact of sustainability (environmental, social, and governance) disclosure and board diversity on firm value: the moderating role of industry sensitivity. Bus Strateg Environ 29:1199–1214. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2427

Rajesh R (2020) Exploring the sustainability performances of firms using environmental, social, and governance scores. J Clean Prod 247:119600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119600

Rajesh R, Rajendran C (2020) Relating environmental, social, and governance scores and sustainability performances of firms: an empirical analysis. Bus Strateg Environ 29:1247–1267. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2429

Reboredo JC, Sowaity SMA (2022) Environmental, social, and governance information disclosure and intellectual capital efficiency in jordanian listed firms. Sustain. 14. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14010115

Rehman RU, Abidin MZU, Ali R, Nor SM, Naseem MA, Hasan M, Ahmad MI (2021) The integration of conventional equity indices with environmental, social, and governance indices: Evidence from emerging economies. Sustain 13:1–27. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13020676

Reveiz L, Chapman E, Asial S, Munoz S, Bonfill X, Alonso-Coello P (2015) Risk of bias of randomized trials over time. J Clin Epidemiol 68:1036–1045. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.06.001

Romano M, Cirillo A, Favino C, Netti A (2020) ESG (Environmental, social and governance) performance and board gender diversity: the moderating role of CEO duality. Sustain 12:1–16. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12219298

Sachin N, Rajesh R (2021) An empirical study of supply chain sustainability with financial performances of Indian firms. Environ Dev Sustain https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-01717-1

Sahoo S, Kumar S (2022) Integration and volatility spillover among environmental, social and governance indices: evidence from BRICS countries. Glob Bus Rev 23:1280–1298. https://doi.org/10.1177/09721509221114699

Sandberg H, Alnoor A, Tiberius V (2022) Environmental, social, and governance ratings and financial performance: evidence from the European food industry. Bus Strateg Environ 2471–2489. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3259

Shahzad F, Baig MH, Rehman IU, Saeed A, Asim GA (2021) Does intellectual capital efficiency explain corporate social responsibility engagement-firm performance relationship? Evidence from environmental, social and governance performance of US listed firms. Borsa Istanbul Rev. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bir.2021.05.003

Shaikh I (2021) Environmental, social, and governance (Esg) practice and firm performance: an international evidence. J Bus Econ Manag 23:218–237. https://doi.org/10.3846/jbem.2022.16202

Shakil MH (2021) Environmental, social and governance performance and financial risk: moderating role of ESG controversies and board gender diversity. Resour Policy 72:102144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2021.102144

Shephard K, Rieckmann M, Barth M (2019) Seeking sustainability competence and capability in the ESD and HESD literature: an international philosophical hermeneutic analysis. Environ Educ Res 25:532–547. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2018.1490947

Sul W, Lee Y (2020) Effects of corporate social responsibility for environmental, social, and governance sectors on firm value: a comparison between consumer and industrial goods companies. Eur J Int Manag 14:866–890. https://doi.org/10.1504/EJIM.2020.109817

Sultana S, Zulkifli N, Zainal D (2018) Environmental, social and governance (ESG) and investment decision in Bangladesh. Sustain 10:1–19. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10061831

Suttipun M, Yordudom T (2022) Impact of environmental, social and governance disclosures on market reaction: an evidence of Top50 companies listed from Thailand. J Financ Report Account 20:753–767. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFRA-12-2020-0377

Taliento M, Favino C, Netti A (2019) Impact of environmental, social, and governance information on economic performance: evidence of a corporate “sustainability advantage” from Europe. Sustain. 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11061738

Terzani S, Turzo T (2021) Religious social norms and corporate sustainability: The effect of religiosity on environmental, social, and governance disclosure. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 28:485–496. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2063

Ting IWK, Azizan NA, Bhaskaran RK, Sukumaran SK (2020) Corporate social performance and firm performance: comparative study among developed and emerging market firms. Sustain. 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU12010026

Tsang YP, Fan Y, Feng ZP (2023) Bridging the gap: building environmental, social and governance capabilities in small and medium logistics companies. J Environ Manag 338:117758. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.117758

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Uyar A, Kuzey C, Karaman AS (2023) Does aggressive environmental, social, and governance engagement trigger firm risk? The moderating role of executive compensation. J Clean Prod 398:136542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.136542

Valor C, Antonetti P, Carrero I (2018) Stressful sustainability: a hermeneutic analysis. Eur J Mark 52:550–574. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-12-2016-0712

Vanderley LB (2020) Conscientização ambiental na implantação de um sistema de gestão ambiental: um estudo de caso em uma empresa do Polo Industrial de Manaus. Sist Gestão 14:335–347. https://doi.org/10.20985/1980-5160.2019.v14n4.1474

Viranda DF, Sari AD, Suryoputro MR, Setiawan N (2020) 5 S Implementation of SME Readiness in Meeting Environmental Management System Standards based on ISO 14001:2015 (Study Case: PT. ABC). IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng 722. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/722/1/012072

Wang S, Li J, Zhao D (2018) Institutional pressures and environmental management practices: the moderating effects of environmental commitment and resource availability. Bus Strateg Environ 27:52–69. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.1983

Wang Y, Ghadimi M, Wang Q, Hou L, Zeraatkar D, Iqbal A, Ho C, Yao L, Hu M, Ye Z, Couban R, Armijo-Olivo S, Bassler D, Briel M, Gluud LL, Glasziou P, Jackson R, Keitz SA, Letelier LM, Ravaud P, Schulz KF, Siemieniuk RAC, Brignardello-Petersen R, Guyatt GH (2022) Instruments assessing risk of bias of randomized trials frequently included items that are not addressing risk of bias issues. J Clin Epidemiol 152:218–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.10.018

Wasiuzzaman S, Ibrahim SA, Kawi F (2022) Environmental, social and governance (ESG) disclosure and firm performance: does national culture matter? Meditari Account Res https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-06-2021-1356

White HD, McCain KW (1998) Visualizing a discipline: an author co-citation analysis of information science, 1972–1995. J Am Soc Inf Sci 49:327–355

Google Scholar  

Wolff RF, Moons KGM, Riley RD, Whiting PF, Westwood M, Collins GS, Reitsma JB, Kleijnen J, Mallett S (2019) PROBAST: a tool to assess the risk of bias and applicability of prediction model studies. Ann Intern Med 170:51–58. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-1376

Xie J, Nozawa W, Yagi M, Fujii H, Managi S (2019) Do environmental, social, and governance activities improve corporate financial performance? Bus Strateg Environ 28:286–300. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2224

Xu J, Liu F, Shang Y (2021) R&D investment, ESG performance and green innovation performance: evidence from China. Kybernetes 50:737–756. https://doi.org/10.1108/K-12-2019-0793

Xu N, Liu J, Dou H (2022) Environmental, social, and governance information disclosure and stock price crash risk: evidence from Chinese listed companies. Front Psychol 13:1–15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.977369

Yin YN, Wang Y, Jiang NJ, Long DR (2020) Can case management improve cancer patients quality of life?: a systematic review following PRISMA. Medicine (Baltimore) 99:e22448. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000022448

Yu EPY, Van Luu B, Chen CH (2020) Greenwashing in environmental, social and governance disclosures. Res Int Bus Financ 52:101192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2020.101192

Zhang Q, Loh L, Wu W (2020) How do environmental, social and governance initiatives affect innovative performance for corporate sustainability? Sustain 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU12083380

Zhang Y, Ruan H, Tang G, Tong L (2021) Power of sustainable development: does environmental management system certification affect a firm’s access to finance? Bus Strateg Environ 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2839

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful for the support received from the Federal University of Paraíba and the Federal Institute of Paraíba.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Federal University of Paraíba, João Pessoa, Paraíba, Brazil

Anrafel de Souza Barbosa, Maria Cristina Basilio Crispim da Silva, Luiz Bueno da Silva & Sandra Naomi Morioka

University of Brasília, Brasília, Brazil

Vinícius Fernandes de Souza

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

For greater transparency, the individual contributions of the authors are as follows: AdSB: contributed to conceptualization, methodology, validation, investigation, data curation, writing—original draft, visualization, and project administration; MCBCdS and LBdS: contributed to validation, writing—review and editing, and supervision; SNM: contributed to validation, methodology, and writing—review and editing; and VFdS: contributed to validation and writing—review and editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anrafel de Souza Barbosa .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Additional information.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

de Souza Barbosa, A., da Silva, M.C.B.C., da Silva, L.B. et al. Integration of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criteria: their impacts on corporate sustainability performance. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 10 , 410 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01919-0

Download citation

Received : 13 November 2022

Accepted : 05 July 2023

Published : 13 July 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01919-0

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Exploring the impact of esg ratings on enterprises' green technology innovation.

  • Mingtao Zhao
  • Abdelmohsen A. Nassani

Environment, Development and Sustainability (2024)

Quick links

  • Explore articles by subject
  • Guide to authors
  • Editorial policies

environmental corporate governance essay

Determinants of environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG) disclosure: a study of Indian companies

  • Original Article
  • Published: 01 August 2020
  • Volume 17 , pages 208–217, ( 2020 )

Cite this article

environmental corporate governance essay

  • Preeti Sharma 1 ,
  • Priyanka Panday   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-1144-8957 1 &
  • R. C. Dangwal 2  

3656 Accesses

85 Citations

Explore all metrics

The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between financial performances and the extent of environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG) disclosure of Indian companies. The content analysis was used to analyse the ESG performance of the sample companies from their annual and sustainability reports. For this purpose, ESG disclosure index is constructed with the help of GRI framework, Clause 49 of listing agreement and relevant literature. Ordinary Least Square (OLS) method was used to examine the relationship between the ESG disclosure index and the independent variables, namely the financial performance, market performance, FIIs stake and leverage after statistically controlling the effects of a firm’s size and the industry type of the companies; results based on the formulated model indicated that financial and market performance have a positive and significant association with the level of ESG disclosure, whereas FIIs stake and leverage have a negative and significant association with the level of ESG disclosure. The findings are limited to the context of the study, and it was limited to Indian companies listed at Bombay Stock Exchange for the period 2013–2016. The sources of data in this study were companies’ annual and sustainability reports. The study may be constructive for organizations and statutory bodies to take into consideration in identification of corporate attributes that will enhance ESG disclosure, since it had been shown in literature that the voluntary corporate social responsibility and corporate governance reporting in India is generally low. In recent times, there has been an increase in ESG reporting, to address the increasing concerns of the stakeholders. Thus, this study will emphasize the level of activities through ESG reporting in Indian companies and help the government to ascertain the level of ESG activities through corporate social responsibility reporting among Indian companies. The study reveals the extent of the disclosure of ESG to companies annual and sustainability reports and constructed the CSR index based on GRI framework and Clause 49 of listing agreement.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

environmental corporate governance essay

Corporate governance and voluntary disclosure of sustainability performance: the case of Jordan

The effects of corporate governance on environmental sustainability reporting: empirical evidence from south asian countries.

environmental corporate governance essay

Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Performance: Reporting Initiatives of Oil and Gas Companies in Central and Eastern Europe

Aboud, A., and A. Diab. 2018. The impact of social, environmental and corporate governance disclosures on firm value. Journal of Accounting in Emerging Economies 8(4): 442–458.

Google Scholar  

Aghdam, S.A. 2015. Determinants of voluntary environmental disclosure: The case of Iran. International Journal of Basic Sciences & Applied Research 4 (6): 343–349.

Atan, R., F.A. Razali, J. Said, and S. Zainun. 2016. Environmental, social and governance (ESG) disclosure and its effect on firm’s performance: A comparative study. International Journal of Economics and Management 10: 355–375.

Aupperle, K., A.B. Carroll, and J. Hatfield. 1985. An empirical examination of the relationship between corporate social responsibility and profitability. Academy of Management Journal 28: 446–465.

Balatbat, Maria C.A., Renard Y.J. Siew, and David G. Carmichael 2012. ESG Scores and its influence on firm performance: Australian evidence. School of Accounting Seminar Series Semester.

Bassen, A., and A.M.M. Kovacs. 2008. Environmental, social and governance key performance indicators from a capital market perspective. Zeitschrift für Wirtschafts-und Unternehmensethik 9 (2): 182–192.

Bourghelle, D., H. Jemel, and C. Louche. 2009. The integration of ESG information into investment processes: Toward an emerging collective belief?

Branco, M.C., and L.L. Rodrigues. 2008. Factors influencing social responsibility disclosure by Portuguese companies. Journal of Business Ethics 83 (4): 685–701.

Breuer, N., and C. Nau. 2014. ESG performance and corporate financial performance. Master’s dissertation, School of Economics and Management, Lunds University.

Brooks, C. 2019. Introductory Econometrics for Finance . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Brooks, C., and I. Oikonomou. 2018. The effects of environmental, social and governance disclosures and performance on firm value: A review of the literature in accounting and finance. The British Accounting Review 50 (1): 1–15.

Chaklader, B., and P.A. Gulati. 2015. A study of corporate environmental disclosure practices of companies doing business in India. Global Business Review 16 (2): 321–335.

Chek, I.T., Z.Z. Mohamad, J. Yunus, and N.M. Norwani. 2013. Corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure in consumer products and plantation industry in Malaysia. American International Journal of Contemporary Research 3 (5): 118–125.

Chetty, S., R. Naidoo, and Y. Seetharam. 2015. The impact of corporate social responsibility on firms’ financial performance in South Africa. Contemporary Economics 9 (2): 193–214.

Clarkson, P.M., Y. Li, G. Richardson, and A. Tsang. 2015. Voluntary external assurance of corporate social responsibility reports and the Dow Jones Sustainability Index membership: International evidence. Unpublished working paper, UQ Business School.

Cormier, D., M.J. Ledoux, and M. Magnan. 2011. The informational contribution of social and environmental disclosures for investors. Management Decision . https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1327044 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Crifo, P., and V.D. Forget. 2013. The economics of CSR: A firm-level perspective survey. Journal of Economic Surveys 29: 112–130.

Dangwal, R.C., and P. Sharma. 2014. Environmental disclosure practices of selected pharmaceutical companies in India. Journal of Accounting and Finance 28 (2): 30–43.

Eccles, Robert G., and George Serafeim. 2011. Accelerating the Adoption of Integrated Reporting. CSR INDEX, eds. Francesco de Leo, Matthias Vollbracht. InnoVatio Publishing Ltd. https://ssrn.com/abstract=1910965 .

Eccles, N.S., and S. Viviers. 2011. The origins and meanings of names describing investment practices that integrate a consideration of ESG issues in the academic literature. Journal of Business Ethics 104 (3): 389–402.

El Ghoul, S., O. Guedhami, and Y. Kim. 2017. Country-level institutions, firm value, and the role of corporate social responsibility initiatives. Journal of International Business Studies 48 (3): 360–385.

Erhemjamts, O., Q. Li, and A. Venkateswaran. 2013. Corporate social responsibility and its impact on firms’ investment policy, organizational structure, and performance. Journal of Business Ethics 118 (2): 395–412.

Farooq, S.U., S. Ullah, and D. Kimani. 2015. The relationship between corporate governance and corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure: Evidence from the USA. Abasyn University Journal of Social Sciences 8 (2): 197–212.

Fauzi, H., and K. Idris. 2009. The relationship of CSR and financial performance: New evidence from Indonesian companies. Issues in Social and Environmental Accounting 3 (1): 66–87.

Friede, G., T. Busch, and A. Bassen. 2015. ESG and financial performance: Aggregated evidence from more than 2000 empirical studies. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 5 (4): 210–233.

Galani, D., E. Gravas, and A. Stavropoulos. 2011. The relation between firm size and environmental disclosure. In International Conference on Applied Economics. hlm , 179–186.

Galani, D., E. Gravas, and A. Stavropoulos. 2012. Company characteristics and environmental policy. Business Strategy and the Environment 21 (4): 236–247.

Gautam, R., and A. Singh. 2010. Corporate social responsibility practices in India: A study of top 500 companies. Global Business and Management Research: An International Journal 2 (1): 41–56.

Ghosh, A. 2013. Corporate sustainability and corporate financial performance: the Indian context, working paper, WPS No. 721/ January 2013, IIM Calcutta.

Gujarati, D.N. 2004. Basic Econometrics . New York: McGraw-Hill Companies.

Ho, S.S.M., and K.S. Wong. 2003. Preparers’ perceptions of corporate reporting and disclosures. International Journal of Disclosure and Governance 1: 71–81.

Jemel-Fornetty, H., C. Louche, and D. Bourghelle. 2011. Changing the dominant convention: The role of emerging initiatives in mainstreaming ESG. In Finance and Sustainability: Towards a New Paradigm , ed. W. Sun, C. Louche, and R. Perez, 85–117. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing.

Joshi, P.L., M.S. Suwaidan, and R. Kumar. 2011. Determinants of environmental disclosures by Indian industrial listed companies: Empirical study. International Journal of Accounting and Finance 3 (2): 109–130.

Kansal, M., M. Joshi, and G.S. Batra. 2014. Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosures: Evidence from India. Advances in Accounting 30 (1): 217–229.

Lapinskienė, G., and M. Tvaronavičienė. 2012. Environmental, social and governance performance of companies: The empirical research on their willingness to disclose information. In 7th International Scientific Conference, Vilnius, Lithuania.

Lokuwaduge, C.S.D.S., and K. Heenetigala. 2017. Integrating environmental, social and governance (ESG) disclosure for a sustainable development: An Australian study. Business Strategy and the Environment 26 (4): 438–450.

Lydenberg, S. 2014. The Potential Use of Sustainability Scenarios as a Supplement to Stock Price in Equity Valuation by Long-Term Investors . New York: Domini Social Investments LLC.

Mallin, C. 2013. International journal of disclosure and governance. International Journal of Disclosure and Governance 10: 193–194. https://doi.org/10.1057/jdg.2013.27 .

McWilliams, A., and D. Siegel. 2000. Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: Correlation or misspecification? Strategic Management Journal 21 (5): 603–609.

Mitra, S., S. Dhar, and K.M. Agrawal. 2008. Assessment of corporate environmental proactiveness. South Asian Journal of Management 15 (3): 101–135.

Montabon, F., R. Sroufe, and R. Narasimhan. 2006. An examination of corporate reporting, environmental management practices and firm performance. Journal of Operations Management 25 (5): 998–1014.

Navi, B.S. 2014. Students’ perceptions about corporate social responsibility at the academic level. International Journal of Management and Development Studies 3 (4): 9–19.

Nurhayati, D. 2015. The Effectiveness of using collaborative strategic reading (CSR) on students’ reading comprehension of narrative text. Doctoral dissertation, Thesis. Jakarta: State Islamic University Syarif Hidayatullah. Retrieved on February 21th, 2018 from http://repository.uinjkt.ac.id/dspace/bitstream/Dede/Nurhayati/FITK.pdf .

Otman, K.A.M. 2014. Corporate governance and firm performance in listed companies in the United Arab Emirates. Doctoral dissertation, Victoria University.

Purnomo, P.K., and L.P. Widianingsih. 2012. The influence of environmental performance on financial performance with corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure as a moderating variable: Evidence from listed companies in Indonesia. Review of Integrative Business and Economics Research 1 (1): 57.

Ragini, 2012. Corporate disclosure of intangibles: A comparative study of practices among Indian, US, Japanese companies. Journal for Decision Makers 37 (3): 51–72.

Raithatha, M., and V. Bapat. 2012. Corporate governance compliance practices of Indian companies. Corporate Governance 3(8): 19–26.

Rouf, D. 2011. The relationship between corporate governance and value of the firm in developing countries: Evidence from Bangladesh. The International Journal of Applied Economics and Finance 5: 237–244.

Sahut, J.M., and H. Pasquini-Descomps. 2015. ESG impact on market performance of firms: International evidence. Management International/International Management/Gestiòn Internacional 19 (2): 40–63.

Sen, A. 2011. Corporate governance in India: Clause 49 of the listing agreement. Gupta, SC 275 Gupta, Sonia 423 Gupta, Swati 353 Gupta, Vishal 569, 238.

Siew, R.Y., M.C. Balatbat, and D.G. Carmichael. 2013a. A review of building/infrastructure sustainability reporting tools (SRTs). Smart and Sustainable Built Environment 2: 106–139.

Siew, R.Y., M.C. Balatbat and D.G. Carmichael. 2013b. The relationship between sustainability practices and financial performance of construction companies. Smart and Sustainable Built Environment .

Smith, M., K. Yahya, and A. Marzuki Amiruddin. 2007. Environmental disclosure and performance reporting in Malaysia. Asian Review of Accounting 15 (2): 185–199.

Taliento, M., C. Favino, and A. Netti. 2019. Impact of environmental, social, and governance information on economic performance: Evidence of a corporate ‘sustainability advantage’ from Europe. Sustainability 11 (6): 1738.

Tarmuji, I., R. Maelah, and N.H. Tarmuji. 2016. The impact of environmental, social and governance practices (ESG) on economic performance: Evidence from ESG score. International Journal of Trade, Economics and Finance 7 (3): 67–74.

Tripathi, V., and V. Bhandari. 2014. Socially responsible investing—An emerging concept in investment management. FIIB Business Review 3 (4): 16–30.

Tseng, M.L., P.A. Tan, S.Y. Jeng, C.W.R. Lin, Y.T. Negash, and S.N.A.C. Darsono. 2019. Sustainable investment: Interrelated among corporate governance, economic performance and market risks using investor preference approach. Sustainability 11 (7): 2108.

Umlas, E. 2008. The global expansion of SRI: Facing challenges, meeting potential. Development and Change 39 (6): 1019–1036.

Uwuigbe, O.R. 2011. Corporate governance and financial performance of banks: A study of listed banks in Nigeria. Doctoral dissertation, Covenant University.

Waddock, S.A., and S.B. Graves. 1997. The corporate social performance–financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal 18 (4): 303–319.

Watson, L. 2015. Corporate social responsibility research in accounting. Journal of Accounting Literature 34: 1–16.

Weber, O. 2014. The financial sector’s impact on sustainable development. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 4 (1): 1–8.

Yao, S., J. Wang, and L. Song. 2011. Determinants of social responsibility disclosure by Chinese firms. The University of Nottingham-China Policy Institute. Discussion paper, 72, 1–30.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

DIT University, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India

Preeti Sharma & Priyanka Panday

Department Of Commerce, HNB Garhwal University, Srinagar Garhwal, India

R. C. Dangwal

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Priyanka Panday .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Sharma, P., Panday, P. & Dangwal, R.C. Determinants of environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG) disclosure: a study of Indian companies. Int J Discl Gov 17 , 208–217 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41310-020-00085-y

Download citation

Received : 23 June 2020

Published : 01 August 2020

Issue Date : December 2020

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41310-020-00085-y

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

  • Environmental
  • Social and corporate governance (ESG)
  • Disclosure practices
  • Corporate attributes
  • Indian companies
  • Find a journal
  • Publish with us
  • Track your research

Free Corporate Governance Essay Examples & Topics

Corporate governance is a set of policies and rules used to direct and control a company’s operations. It is essential for managing a firm and balancing the interests of the stakeholders, shareholders, executive directors, suppliers, and customers. Accountability, transparency, fairness, and responsibility form the corporate governance framework.

Assigned a corporate governance essay? Our IvyPanda team is ready to help you with this task. But before all else, let’s learn its essential aspects.

There are a few key principles of corporate governance. Firstly , shareholders have control over the boards. Their voting rights directly depend on their economic interests.

Secondly , boards should keep in touch with the shareholders and meet their expectations. Thus, they should have strong leadership skills. In essence, they are responsible for enhancing the effectiveness and adopting new practices.

Finally , boards should develop a working management system. Its goal is to positively affect a company’s performance in the long run.

In this article, we have collected corporate governance essay questions and examples. They will assist you in preparing and writing your paper. Additionally, you will find free samples written by fellow students.

Great Corporate Governance Essay Questions

Checking corporate governance assignment topics can be useful for many reasons:

  • You can look through multiple ideas at the same time. Thus, you may understand what it would be interesting to write about.
  • Different ideas can show you how to formulate your own topic.
  • Lastly, you can find an idea for your work.

We have put together a small list for you to check. Find more ideas by trying our title generator . It will create new topics for your paper automatically.

Here are some corporate governance topics:

  • What is corporate governance? How do you implement it correctly?
  • The role of the audit committee in developing an effective financial management strategy.
  • What are some examples of corporate governance approaches in American firms?
  • Should employees who have children with disabilities have extra social care benefits?
  • Accounting fraud and possible ways to deter it.
  • The role of business ethics in striving for equality and eliminating discrimination at the workplace.
  • Top 5 the most effective governance models.
  • Governance research in developing an efficient long-term managing strategy.
  • What are the similarities and differences in corporate governance principles in public and private firms?
  • Advantages and disadvantages of cultural diversity at the workplace.
  • How can corporate governance help prevent the firm’s economic crisis?
  • Structure hierarchy vs. flat management model. What is more appropriate for governing large corporations?
  • Agency relationship between two parties. Possible problems that may occur in this kind of cooperation.
  • The effect of corporate social responsibility on a firm’s image and reputation.
  • How to recover from failures in project management and take the maximum benefit from them.
  • The importance of having a clear mission statement for the company’s reputation in the market.
  • How can a company reach sustainability in terms of production and distribution of the products?

5 Corporate Governance Examples

In your essay, you can consider examples of corporate governance for different reasons. They can be used as a subject of discussion, evaluation, or as supporting evidence. That’s why we have provided some good examples in this section:

  • Integrated business management system (IBMS)

In most organizations, each department has its own key performance indicators. Yet, it is essential to see a holistic picture of the company’s performance. One of the solutions is to imply IBMS and combine all management systems. IMBS ensures transparency, cross-departmental collaboration, traceability, and visibility.

  • Regular internal audits

The role of routine internal audits cannot be underestimated. They allow identifying current problems and vulnerabilities in the company. Moreover, audits help evaluate the corporate environment and make some adjustments if needed.

  • Training management system

Investments in employees’ training are always a great idea! The knowledge and skills that the workers acquire during the courses will bring valuable input to a company. Thus, simple training can boost the company’s performance to a great extent.

  • Risk management

Identifying, accessing, and managing the risk are the key elements of successful corporate governance. It is essential for the company’s managers to acknowledge the possible threats. Plus, they should have a clear plan of how to overcome these obstacles.

Successful management relies on valid data. Therefore, it is essential to report true key performance indicators. It will help evaluate the firm’s achievements and adjust the strategy if needed.

Thank you for reading! Below, see corporate governance, diversity, and inclusion essay examples. They will help you better understand the subject and how to write about it. You can shorten each paper with our summarizer to read them faster.

202 Best Essay Examples on Corporate Governance

Environmental, social and corporate governance.

  • Words: 1468

Etisalat Company: Organization Theory and Design

  • Words: 1145

What is corporate governance?

  • Words: 1152

Starbucks: Corporate Finance Analysis

  • Words: 3753

The Roles of an Internal Auditor in Corporate Governance

Delta airlines: corporate governance and leadership issues.

  • Words: 2618

British Petroleum Company’s Corporate Governance Failure

Corporate governance and corporate social responsibility.

  • Words: 2731

Organizational Structure at Starbucks

  • Words: 1057

Cross-Cultural Management and HRM in Walmart

  • Words: 3606

The Anglo- American Model and the European Model of Corporate Governance

  • Words: 2203

Inclusion and Diversity

Bureaucracy in an organization, corporate governance in satyam computer services ltd.

  • Words: 3197

Singapore Post Limited’s Corporate Governance

  • Words: 2503

Agency Theory in Corporate Governance: Criticism and Real Application

  • Words: 3867

Effective Project Governance in Organizations

  • Words: 2999

Twenty four hour garage

  • Words: 1604

The Concept of Organizational Commitment in Human Resource Management

Corporate governance practice: nike in vietnam.

  • Words: 11113

Corporate Governance in the Documentary “Inside Job”

  • Words: 1570

Corporate Governance Role of Non Executive Directors

  • Words: 1107

Matrix Organizational Structure

  • Words: 1403

Corporate Governance Statements: BHP Billiton and National Australia Bank

  • Words: 2108

Corporate Governance and Risk Management

  • Words: 3825

HP Acquisition of Autonomy in 2011

The arguments for and against mandatory system of corporate governance.

  • Words: 1365

Governance, Ethics and Law

  • Words: 1162

Accountability and Performance Measurement of Corporate Governance in the Public Sector of Saudi Arabia

  • Words: 1591

Corporate Governance Impact on Firm Performance

  • Words: 4406

Proposal to Reduce Carbon Footprint Through Improved Corporate Governance

  • Words: 9267

Tanzanian Banking Sector: Corporate Governance

Corporate governance: the main theories, sarbanes-oxley act, synergy, and mncs in developing countries, walmart inc.’s corporate governance regulation through nonprosecution.

  • Words: 2571

Corporate Governance and Dispute Settlement

Et-moone and business-to-business relationships, corporate governance and voluntary risk disclosure, corporate governance failures discussion, corporate governance and its role in business, acwa power governance changes, corporate internal governance structure & innovation behavior.

  • Words: 3932

Corporate Governance at Wirecard

Companies’ primary responsibilities and strategies, board of directors importance for company, diversicare healthcare services inc.’s obstacles, ukraine’s code of corporate governance, corporate governance in emerging economies, deloitte touche tohmatsu limited firm’s governance model.

  • Words: 1003

Executive Compensation and Board of Directors’ Decisions

  • Words: 1104

Agency Theory: The “Combined Code” and the SOX

  • Words: 1426

HRM Role and Fixing Corporate Governance Failures

  • Words: 4445

IT Governance at Richter Company

  • Words: 2334

Corporate Governance at SingPost

  • Words: 2601

Institutional Governance Mechanisms and Expectation Gap

  • Words: 1124

Business Performance and CSR of FAI

  • Words: 3000

Governance Failures in Australian Banking Sector

  • Words: 1208

Activism in Visual and Media Culture: Characteristics of Corporations

  • Words: 2022

The Impact of Corporate Governance and Ownership Structure

  • Words: 2205

Evaluation of Corporate Performance

  • Words: 2211

CQUniversity: Corporate Governance and Ethics

  • Words: 1984

CFO Report: Chesapeake Energy Corporation

  • Words: 4434

Directors of The Procter & Gamble Company

Cases of successful and of failing corporate governance, cross-sectional differences in corporate capital structures.

  • Words: 2291

Ways of Improving Corporate Governance in the Post-Enron Era

  • Words: 4233

The Kraft – Cadbury Takeover and the Glencore-Xstrata Merger

  • Words: 1999

Recommendations for the Corporate Governance Best Practice

  • Words: 1106

Regulations in Corporate Governance

  • Words: 4142

Insurance Companies’ Profitability in Saudi Arabia

  • Words: 1919

Corporate Governance: Problems of the Hewlett Packard

Deming: 14 points of transformation.

  • Words: 1928

Chapters 1-2 of Corporate Governance by Kenneth

Proxy fight: genzyme, companies and corporation liquidation and bankruptcies: with a focus on saudi arabia.

  • Words: 4329

Internal Audit in Saudi Companies

  • Words: 1183

Sarbanes-Oxley Act and Nonprofit Organizations

  • Words: 1341

Corporate Governance and Disclosures on the Transition to International Financial Reporting Standards

Riordian manufacturing co.: corporate compliance plan.

  • Words: 2818

Reputation of National Social Security Authority

  • Words: 2125

Corporate Social Responsibility Activity

Corporate health policy overview, importance of agency relationships, on the relevance of bureaucracy, director’s behaviour and company ceos trustworthiness perception, corporate governance in germany.

  • Words: 1477

Corporate Governance and Its Reform in Hong Kong

  • Words: 1377

How Corporate Leadership Controls Hotel Franchise

  • Words: 3065

The Phenomena of Open Innovation

Changes in the company due to external and internal factors, ibm: issues in democratic principles & diversity in the workplace, merger and acquistion: terms definition, abu dhabi commercial bank: corporate governance principles.

  • Words: 1255

Ganong Bros Critical Financial Time Analysis

  • Words: 1409

Group Motivation Inventory

Stakeholder relationships, social responsibility, and corporate governance, corporate performance, governance, and business ethics, on the need to save general motors from bankruptcy, corporate governance: term definition, us companies’ ceos: severance packages, failures and results.

  • Words: 1388

Environmental, Social, and Governance Metrics in Business

  • Words: 1460

COSO and COBIT Committees in a Field for Corporate Auditions

The concept of corporate governance.

  • Words: 1197

Business Roundtable on Corporate Governance in 1997 and 2019

  • Words: 1663

Corporate Governance Issues in the Company

Corporate governance framework and financial performance, sarbanes-oxley evaluation and its implications, sarbanes-oxley act and us corporate governance, sarbanes-oxley act and corporate governance, etisalat: change as an innovation, corporate and information security governance, corporate governance concepts.

  • Words: 1342

Corporate Governance Understanding

  • Words: 1401

Assessing and Managing Sustainability

  • Words: 2404

Corporate Government During the World Financial Crisis

  • Words: 1550

Corporate Governance During the Global Financial Crisis

  • Words: 1500

Corporate Governance: Enron and Parmalat Case

Corporation directors’ and shareholders’ duties, overcoming the five dysfunctions of a team.

  • Words: 1404

Effects of Corporate Governance on Firm Performance

  • Words: 8248

REVIEW article

The linkage between global financial crises, corporate social responsibility and climate change: unearthing research opportunities through bibliometric reviews provisionally accepted.

  • 1 Kotebe University of Education, Ethiopia
  • 2 University of Johannesburg, South Africa

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

Financial matters, corporate social responsibility (CSR), climate change, and other sustainable solutions all work in tandem. In order to provide a thorough understanding of the integration between various components during crises, it is necessary to provide knowledge of the interaction between financial, societal, and environmental aspects. In order to accomplish this, hundreds of papers were examined and presented using bibliometric analysis. The study demonstrated that, when examining financial crises in relation to CSR and climate change, sustainability issues were clearly examined. Sustainability, environmental economics, governance approaches, and sustainable development are some of the main issues in this comprehensive subject. Besides, the emerging topics that need more research include organizational resilience, global financial crises, and sustainable performance, while there are no specific themes developed in the subject matter that integrate financial crises, CSR, and climate change. Thus, future researchers need to provide new insights on the integration of these concepts.

Keywords: Financial crises, CSR, Climate Change, sustainability, scientific mapping, thematic

Received: 19 Feb 2024; Accepted: 08 May 2024.

Copyright: © 2024 Chebo, Dhliwayo and Batu. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

* Correspondence: Mx. Abdella K. Chebo, Kotebe University of Education, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

People also looked at

FTSE Mondo Visione Exchanges Index: var data = { "range": "Sheet1!A1:B1", "majorDimension": "ROWS", "values": [ [ "72,939.10", "-17.80" ] ] } ; var price = data.values[0][0]; var change = data.values[0][1]; document.write(price); document.write(" "); if (parseInt(change) '+ change +" "); } else { document.write(' +'+ change +" "); }

Set sustainability forum 2024 calls on all thai capital market stakeholders to reflect on governance practices for strengthening trust in the global market.

Date 15/02/2024

The Stock Exchange of Thailand (SET) and SET ESG Academy, together with capital market executives locally and abroad today organized “SET Sustainability Forum 1/2024: Grounding Greater Governance for Good”. The forum is aimed at emphasizing the significance of robust corporate governance as the cornerstone for sustainable business development and investment.  The discussions centered around the crucial aspects of reliable quality environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG) data, as well as its application in driving impactful business and investment decisions both locally and globally.

A SET governor and Chairperson of the Sustainability Committee Adjunct Professor Dr. Kittipong Kittayarak, in the opening remarks and keynote speech on the topic of “Grounding Greater Governance for Good”, said that sustainable businesses are not born out of good intentions alone, but also with a purpose-driven by robust corporate governance.  In addition to risk management, corporate governance provides key drivers for business success including competitive advantage and innovation, delivering tangible value at every step.

Another highlight of the event was an exclusive talk titled "Re-examining the Importance of Governance in Corporate Sustainability and ESG Investing" by Helena Fung, Head of Sustainable Finance and Investment, Asia Pacific, at the London Stock Exchange Group (LSEG). “Investors globally are prioritizing corporate sustainability performance as an integral part of their investment decision making process. We are pleased to support SET in this important event underlining the importance of strong corporate governance frameworks, transparency and disclosure on material sustainability issues aligned to global standards, Fung emphasized.  

The event comprised two captivating sharing and discussion sessions, engaging key stakeholders. The first session, "Rebuilding Trust: The Rise of Governance in Investment Decisions and Corporate Sustainability", witnessed a dynamic exchange of knowledge and experiences among data users in the field of sustainable investing. The second session, "Communicating Greater Governance through Responsible Data", provided valuable insights from data providers, new-generation investors, and regulatory bodies, including the guidelines that cater to the expectations of stakeholders in all dimensions. These fruitful sessions fostered synergies and encouraged the sharing of crucial insights among capital market executives.

The success of the “SET Sustainability Forum 1/2024: Grounding Greater Governance for Good” event was held on February 15 th , 2024, sets the stage for an upcoming event later this year. This forthcoming gathering will focus on presenting ESG Best Practices, equipping businesses with the necessary understanding and know-how to drive sustainable practices within organizations and boost the Thai capital market.

Interested persons can watch the seminar recordings via online channels, Facebook & YouTube: SET Thailand.

  • Back to List

Get Email Updates from Ballotpedia

First Name *

Please complete the Captcha above

Ballotpedia on Facebook

  Share this page

  Follow Ballotpedia

Ballotpedia on Twitter

World economic forum holds meeting in riyadh (2024).

ESG - Teal - D2.jpg

  • Key terms related to ESG
  • Areas of inquiry and disagreement
  • Opposition to ESG
  • Public pension information by state
  • Subscribe here

May 7, 2024

The World Economic Forum (WEF) held a meeting last week in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, where more than 1,000 attendees, including BlackRock CEO Larry Fink, discussed goals and policies related to ESG :

  • Environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG)
  • Economy and Society : Ballotpedia's ESG newsletter

External links

  • Search Google News for this topic
  • ↑ Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
  • Pages using DynamicPageList3 dplreplace parser function
  • ESG page views
  • May 2024 ESG

Ballotpedia features 488,375 encyclopedic articles written and curated by our professional staff of editors, writers, and researchers. Click here to contact our editorial staff or report an error . For media inquiries, contact us here . Please donate here to support our continued expansion.

Information about voting

  • What's on my ballot?
  • Where do I vote?
  • How do I register to vote?
  • How do I request a ballot?
  • When do I vote?
  • When are polls open?
  • Who represents me?

2024 Elections

  • Presidential election
  • Presidential candidates
  • Congressional elections
  • Ballot measures
  • State executive elections
  • State legislative elections
  • State judge elections
  • Local elections
  • School board elections

2025 Elections

  • State executives
  • State legislatures
  • State judges
  • Municipal officials
  • School boards
  • Election legislation tracking
  • State trifectas
  • State triplexes
  • Redistricting
  • Pivot counties
  • State supreme court partisanship
  • Polling indexes

Public Policy

  • Administrative state
  • Criminal justice policy
  • Education policy
  • Unemployment insurance
  • Work requirements
  • Policy in the states

Information for candidates

  • Ballotpedia's Candidate Survey
  • How do I run for office?
  • How do I update a page?
  • Election results
  • Send us candidate contact info

Get Engaged

  • Donate to Ballotpedia
  • Report an error
  • Newsletters
  • Ballotpedia podcast
  • Ballotpedia Boutique
  • Media inquiries
  • Premium research services
  • 2024 Elections calendar
  • 2024 Presidential election
  • Biden Administration
  • Recall elections
  • Ballotpedia News

SITE NAVIGATION

  • Ballotpedia's Sample Ballot
  • 2024 Congressional elections
  • 2024 State executive elections
  • 2024 State legislative elections
  • 2024 State judge elections
  • 2024 Local elections
  • 2024 Ballot measures
  • Upcoming elections
  • 2025 Statewide primary dates
  • 2025 State executive elections
  • 2025 State legislative elections
  • 2025 Local elections
  • 2025 Ballot measures
  • Cabinet officials
  • Executive orders and actions
  • Key legislation
  • Judicial nominations
  • White House senior staff
  • U.S. President
  • U.S. Congress
  • U.S. Supreme Court
  • Federal courts
  • State government
  • Municipal government
  • Election policy
  • Running for office
  • Ballotpedia's weekly podcast
  • About Ballotpedia
  • Editorial independence
  • Job opportunities
  • News and events
  • Privacy policy
  • Disclaimers

environmental corporate governance essay

COMMENTS

  1. The Corporate Governance of Environmental Sustainability: A Review and

    To address this gap, our integrative framework relates the key corporate governance actors to environmental sustainability outcomes from the extant literature and highlights its main methodological approaches and theoretical arguments. Our framework provides a critical analysis of what we know and points to the knowledge gaps around owners ...

  2. Introduction to ESG

    Interest on the part of investors and other corporate stakeholders in environmental, social and governance ("ESG") matters has surged in recent years, and the current economic, public health and social justice crises have only intensified this focus. ESG, at its core, is a means by which companies can be evaluated with respect to a broad […]

  3. Corporate governance and environmental sustainability: Addressing the

    To our knowledge, the most recent academic studies that explore corporate governance, environmental sustainability, or their combination using bibliometric approach or through a review of the literature are Aguilera et al. 2021), Kumar et al. , Tao et al. , and Zaman et al. . In the following discussion, we address the main findings of these ...

  4. The effect of corporate governance on corporate environmental

    Since concerns over climate change are more pressing than ever, firms need to take action to improve corporate environmental sustainability (CES). Corporate governance (CG)—the "system by which companies are directed and controlled" (The World Bank, 2016)—is essential for shaping CES (Galbreath, 2010; Kanashiro, 2020).

  5. (PDF) The Corporate Governance of Environmental Sustainability: A

    To address this gap, our integrative framework relates the key corporate governance actors to environmental sustainability outcomes from the extant literature and highlights its main ...

  6. PDF Three Essays on Environmental, Social, and Governance ...

    Entitled: Three Essays on Environmental, Social, and Governance Transparency and submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor Of Philosophy (Accountancy) complies with the regulations of the University and meets the accepted standards with respect to originality and quality.

  7. PDF Environmental, Social, and Corporate Governance: A History of ESG

    Wang 3 Glossary ESG: Environment, Social, and Corporate Governance Carbon Trading: The transaction of carbon emission credits; credits could be used to fulfill emission reduction requirements on a nation or a corporate level, or to speculate Greenhouse Gasses (GHG): Gasses that trap heat in the atmosphere and contribute to the greenhouse effect, which leads to global warming and climate change ...

  8. Integration of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criteria

    In a corporate sustainability context, scholars have been studying internal and external relations provided by Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criteria, mostly from the organizational ...

  9. The effect of corporate governance on corporate environmental

    Climate change is a major challenge facing society. Given its intricate links with business, governance scholars have shown an increasing interest in understanding how corporate governance (CG) actors can improve corporate environmental sustainability (CES). In this article, we review the literature focusing on CG and CES.

  10. ESG

    Environmental Markets vs. Environmental Mandates: Capturing Prosperity and Environmental Quality is a new essay in the Institute's series on the ESG (environmental, social and governance) movement. It shows that the same institutions that promote economic growth—secure property rights and the rule of law—also promote environmental quality because the former creates the conditions for ...

  11. Environmental, Social and Corporate Governance Essay

    The ESG analysis has increased accountability and corporate social responsibility in different industries. For example, the Paris 2016 Agreement on Climate Change made companies conscious of the harm that they possibly cause to the environment (Escrig-Olmedo et al., 2019).

  12. Corporate governance in today's world: Looking back and an agenda for

    In this essay, we highlight key changes in the corporate governance context over the past two decades and provide scholars a roadmap for future research. ... Aguilera RV, Aragón-Correa JA, Marano V, et al. (2021) The corporate governance of environmental sustainability: A review and proposal for more integrated research. Journal of Management ...

  13. Environmental, Social, and Governance Issues: An Empirical ...

    According to Davis (), Corporate Social Responsibility should be interpreted in a managerial context and it can be justified only in the light of a long-run economic gain to the firm.However, there were contrary opinions about the issue. Corporate Governance considers two main theories which have guided companies' business strategy during the time, as well as the Shareholder Theory (Friedman ...

  14. Unveiling the Impacts of Corporate Environmental, Social, and ...

    Amidst heightened scrutiny of corporate environmental, social, and governance (ESG) practices, this study employs threshold techniques combined with artificial neural networks to examine the impact of ESG disclosure on companies, emphasizing its pivotal role in promoting sustainability. Analyzing data from Taiwan's 20 industries from 2012 to 2022, it finds that while ESG engagement ...

  15. Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) practice and firm

    Environmental, Social, and Governance aspects. e study' s r esearch problem is to examine the e ects of non-market transnatio nal sustainability strategy on rm performance. e st udy presents

  16. Determinants of environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG

    The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between financial performances and the extent of environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG) disclosure of Indian companies. The content analysis was used to analyse the ESG performance of the sample companies from their annual and sustainability reports. For this purpose, ESG disclosure index is constructed with the help of GRI ...

  17. Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) and Corporate ...

    This study examines whether and how environmental, social, and governance (ESG) performance is associated with corporate financialization. ... PAPERS. 34,284. This Journal is curated by: René M. Stulz at Ohio State University (OSU) - Department of Finance. ... Corporate Governance: Economic Consequences, History, Development, & Methodology ...

  18. Environmental governance

    Corporate governance is the set of processes, customs, policies, laws, and institutions affecting the way a corporation (or company) is managed. Corporate governance is affected by the relationships among stakeholders. These stakeholders research and quantify performance to compare and contrast the environmental performance of thousands of ...

  19. Environmental, social, and governance

    Environmental, social, and governance (ESG), is a set of aspects, including environmental issues, social issues and corporate governance that can be considered in investing.Investing with ESG considerations is sometimes referred to as responsible investing or, in more proactive cases, impact investing.. The term ESG first came to prominence in a 2004 report titled "Who Cares Wins", which was a ...

  20. (PDF) Sustainability reporting nexus to corporate governance in

    Abstract and Figures. Sustainability reporting has become a practice of the majority and is decided by boards of directors as the supreme governing body in the decision-making process of companies ...

  21. Sustainability

    An environmental, social and governance (ESG) evaluation system can focus on the value of enterprises more comprehensively and better scrutinize the development premise of enterprise. As a novel investment concept, both domestic and foreign investors widely acknowledge the significance of ESG. With the implementation of "carbon peak", "carbon neutral" and other national strategies, an ...

  22. Free Corporate Governance Essay Examples & Topics

    Corporate governance is a set of policies and rules used to direct and control a company's operations. It is essential for managing a firm and balancing the interests of the stakeholders, shareholders, executive directors, suppliers, and customers. Accountability, transparency, fairness, and responsibility form the corporate governance framework.

  23. Environmental, social, and governance ...

    The corporate sector strives to improve its environmental, social, and governance (ESG) performance to transition from short-term to sustainable long-term profit maximisation. This study thus explores the impact of ESG performance on the financial sustainability (FS) of a sample of the top 100 global high-tech firms.

  24. The inclusion of biodiversity into Environmental, Social, and

    Traditional Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) metrics have primarily focused on promoting sustainable finance, positive screening, and sustainability reporting. However, recent research highlights the urgency for greater accountability and action to counter species extinction. This article explores the potential of ESG frameworks in guiding corporate and managerial decision-making to ...

  25. Frontiers

    Financial matters, corporate social responsibility (CSR), climate change, and other sustainable solutions all work in tandem. In order to provide a thorough understanding of the integration between various components during crises, it is necessary to provide knowledge of the interaction between financial, societal, and environmental aspects. In order to accomplish this, hundreds of papers were ...

  26. Does Your EV Hurt, or Help, the Economy?

    A product that helps the environment yet poses a risk to the economy will lose public backing as it grows. It seems to be happening already.

  27. Bloomberg launches ESG compliance tool (2024)

    Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics. See also: Environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG) May 7, 2024. Bloomberg Professional Services launched a new tool last week that it argues will help investors better comply with ESG/sustainability regulatory requirements:

  28. SET Sustainability Forum 2024 Calls On All Thai Capital Market

    The Stock Exchange of Thailand (SET) and SET ESG Academy, together with capital market executives locally and abroad today organized "SET Sustainability Forum 1/2024: Grounding Greater Governance for Good". The forum is aimed at emphasizing the significance of robust corporate governance as the cornerstone for sustainable business development and investment. The discussions centered ...

  29. World Economic Forum holds meeting in Riyadh (2024)

    Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics. See also: Opposition to environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG) investing See also: Environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG) May 7, 2024. The World Economic Forum (WEF) held a meeting last week in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, where more than 1,000 attendees, including BlackRock CEO Larry Fink, discussed goals and policies ...

  30. ESG controversies and corporate performance: The moderating effect of

    1 INTRODUCTION. In today's corporate landscape, the prominence of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) factors marks a significant transformation in how businesses navigate their multifaceted roles within broader societal and environmental contexts (Boukattaya et al., 2022; Boulhaga et al., 2023; Busch & Schnippering, 2022; Durand et al., 2019; Raimo et al., 2020).