To make high-quality research more accessible and easier to explore.

Fields:
8 results

The Role of Private Disclosures in Markets with Weak Institutions: Evidence from Market Liberalization in China

The Accounting Review 2021 96(4), 433-455 open access
ABSTRACT I use the announcement of a market liberalization pilot program in China as a shock to firms' disclosure environment and examine how Chinese firms, foreign investors, and foreign brokers respond. Using a proprietary dataset, I find that affected firms respond to the announcement by significantly increasing the number of selective private meetings hosted by major foreign brokers, but do not use public disclosure channels. I find this increase in private disclosure to be stronger among firms that had strong public disclosure track records and are in need of capital. Firms that increased private disclosure experience improvements in speed of price discovery and liquidity. In addition, they also experience an increase in foreign holdings and raise capital abroad through foreign brokers after the pilot program's implementation. Overall, this paper takes a yet-to-mature economy, presents evidence on dynamic shaping of disclosure, and highlights private disclosure as an important positive channel of communication.

Shareholder value implications of supply chain ESG: evidence from negative incidents

Review of Accounting Studies 2025 30(3), 2185-2217 open access
Using a novel measure that captures negative ESG incidents at both listed and private suppliers, we provide large-scale evidence on the value implications of supply chain ESG. We find that firms with fewer supply chain ESG incidents exhibit higher future accounting performance and that this effect is stronger in the presence of more conscious customers and vulnerable supply chains. We also find that firms with robust supply chain ESG exhibit higher future stock returns and that this effect is more pronounced when information frictions are higher, which suggests that it takes time for the market to understand the value implications of supply chain ESG. Overall, we highlight the benefits of managing supply chain ESG and the decision usefulness of the related information.

Corporate Sustainability: First Evidence on Materiality

The Accounting Review 2016 91(6), 1697-1724
ABSTRACT Using newly available materiality classifications of sustainability topics, we develop a novel dataset by hand-mapping sustainability investments classified as material for each industry into firm-specific sustainability ratings. This allows us to present new evidence on the value implications of sustainability investments. Using both calendar-time portfolio stock return regressions and firm-level panel regressions, we find that firms with good ratings on material sustainability issues significantly outperform firms with poor ratings on these issues. In contrast, firms with good ratings on immaterial sustainability issues do not significantly outperform firms with poor ratings on the same issues. These results are confirmed when we analyze future changes in accounting performance. The results have implications for asset managers who have committed to the integration of sustainability factors in their capital allocation decisions.

Global versus Local ESG Ratings: Evidence from China

The Accounting Review 2025 100(4), 161-192 open access
ABSTRACT We compare the ESG ratings of MSCI, a global rater, with those of SINO, a local Chinese rater, to evaluate their effectiveness in capturing ESG risks within the Chinese context. Using ESG issues revealed in negative incidents as a proxy for ESG risk, we find that the ratings from the two raters often diverge, with SINO generally outperforming MSCI in predicting ESG risks in China. This divergence is more pronounced for firms with extensive ESG disclosures and when there are significant differences in how the raters define and measure ESG issues. Distance-based information asymmetry does not appear to play a significant role in explaining the performance gap. The advantage of local raters likely stems from their flexibility in tailoring methodologies to reflect country-specific nuances. In contrast, global raters adopt consistent methodologies to meet investor demand for comparability, but this approach may inadvertently reduce their relevance for capturing localized ESG risks. Data Availability: Data are available from sources identified in the text. JEL Classifications: G14; M4.