We examine how natural disasters affect the corporate environmental, social, and governance (ESG) disclosure policies of firms located close to disaster areas. We study firms located in counties neighboring those impacted by natural disasters and find that, on average, these firms increase their ESG disclosure transparency over the period subsequent to the disaster. Given that our sample firms are located outside of the area directly impacted by the disaster, the changes in disclosure transparency after the disaster are consistent with managers increasing their preference for transparency as their risk salience increases. Further, we find that firms with a higher percentage of local institutional ownership are more likely to increase ESG disclosure after experiencing nearby disasters. The findings suggest that managers strategically react to a change in investors' risk perception by increasing ESG disclosure

We provide the most comprehensive analysis to date of the relation between ESG ratings and stock returns, using 16,000+ stocks in 48 countries and seven different ESG rating providers. We find very little evidence that ESG ratings are related to global stock returns between 2001 and 2020. This finding obtains across different regions, time periods, ESG (sub)ratings, ESG momentum, ESG downgrades and upgrades, and best-in-class strategies. We further find little empirical support for prominent hypotheses from the literature on the role of ESG uncertainty and of country-level ESG social norms, ESG disclosure standards, and ESG regulations in shaping the relation between ESG and global stock returns. Overall, our results suggest that ESG investing did not systematically affect investment performance during the past two decades

We study the association between environmental, social, and governance (ESG) government risk management and firm-level IPO underpricing between 2008 and 2018. Examining 7446 IPOs issued in 36 countries, we find that IPO underpricing tends to be lower in countries with higher ESG Government Ratings. When we uniquely examine the environmental, social, and governance pillars, we find that underpricing tends to be lower in countries with stronger risk management practices in each of these areas. Additional analysis indicates that the negative impact of ESG ratings on IPO underpricing is more pronounced in countries with more transparent financial disclosures, higher liability standards, and stronger shareholder protections

This paper sheds light on the impact that environmental, social and governance (ESG) corporate practice disclosure has on equity financing. We present a unique framed field experiment in which professional private equity investors competed in closed auctions to acquire fictive firms. We hence observe that corporate non-financial (ESG) performance disclosure impacts firm valuation and investment decision and we quantify to which extent. Main result is an asymmetric effect, investors reacting more to bad ESG practice disclosure than to good ESG ones. Our findings are discussed in terms of practical implications for both investors and firm managers

This study investigates the imbalance of ESG investing across its environmental (E), social (S), and governance (G) pillars. We find that E plays a more significant role in influencing the imbalance level, and mutual funds prioritize mitigating E risks over S and G risks, which is more pronounced in funds with higher sustainability ratings. Moreover, our findings indicate that investors respond to ESG imbalance, with the level of imbalance showing a negative impact on fund flows, especially for funds with higher sustainability ratings. However, this negative relationship is mitigated as climate change concerns increase. Furthermore, we find that political ideology plays a role in the ESG imbalance, with the imbalance of funds in blue states being more driven by lower environmental considerations compared to those in red states. Additionally, we observe that the ESG imbalance is positively associated with various fund risks. Our study offers implications for policymakers and stakeholders in the asset management industry regarding ESG investing practices

We develop a continuous-time model in which an ESG investor hires a manager to run a project and incentivizes the manager to fulfill ESG responsibilities. The manager’s private efforts and ESG investing determine the project’s cash flow and ESG performance subject to random shocks. We derive the optimal contract and its implementation after introducing carbon credits following the cap-and-trade program in practice. We provide comparative static analysis and empirical implications. The results demonstrate that ESG investing enhances contract efficiency. The more significant the carbon emission reduction, or the less the cost of ESG investing, the higher the contract efficiency, the average q, the marginal q, and the optimal investment–capital ratios, implying that ESG investing mitigates inefficiencies arising from information asymmetry and enhances investment values. Our model predictions are partially verified by empirical facts

We examine whether firms' ESG performance is influenced by bondholder preferences. We argue that insurance companies have unique incentives to monitor bond issuers' ESG performance because insurers face enhanced exposures to ESG shocks in their balance sheets and trading operations. Consistent with this argument, we find that firms with higher bond ownership by insurance companies are associated with higher future ESG ratings. To address potential identification concerns, we test changes in bond issuers' ESG ratings following the initial bond investment by insurance companies. We find that firms' ESG performance improves after insurance companies' initial bond investment. We also find that this improvement in ESG performance is concentrated in firms with greater reliance on bond financing and investment capital from insurance companies. Our study underscores the importance of bond ownership structure in influencing corporate ESG performance

Using a sample of 3083 firms from 62 countries over 18 years, we analyze how the structure and identity of firms' material owners influence their Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) performance. We find that firms with founding families or other individual investors as owners underperform, unless family members serve as CEOs, when they outperform all others. Non-family management and government entities also perform significantly better in most analyses. These results are robust to multiple data and methodological stress tests. Our findings show that ownership matters for ESG performance and give us an indication of the preferences of different types of owners regarding ESG

We reexamine the impact of hedge fund activism on corporate social performance as measured by ESG ratings. Using a high-quality dataset on hedge fund activism, we find that the impact of hedge fund activism on ESG ratings is neither statistically nor economically significant. In our preferred model, relative to control firms, the ESG ratings of target firms increase by 0.033, about 1.6 % of the sample standard deviation, following activist interventions. In addition, we find no evidence that stock market reactions to the announcement of activist interventions are significantly higher for firms with high ESG ratings, inconsistent with the view that hedge fund activism harms corporate social performance to benefit shareholders

This paper investigates whether and how business sustainability performance and disclosure factors affect stock price informativeness (SPI). We find that non-financial environmental, social, and governance (ESG) sustainability performance factors are positively associated with idiosyncratic volatility (our proxy for SPI) after controlling for financial-economic performance. We further show that the association between sustainability performance factors and SPI is stronger for firms with higher sustainability disclosure. We find that the association between ESG sustainability performance factors and SPI is stronger when economic performance is weaker, suggesting that investors tend to pay more attention to ESG performance factors when firms are financially underperforming. This study shows that investors pay attention to both firm economic performance (corporate profitability and growth prospect) and ESG sustainability performance and disclosure factors, which have implications for policymakers, regulators, investors, businesses, and researchers