This paper explores the relationship between environmental, social and governance (ESG) information and systemic risk, an increasingly important issue for both regulators and investors. While ESG ratings are widely used to assess a company’s non-financial performance, the impact of these factors on financial stability and systemic risk is still under debate. By extending the Forecast Error Variance Decomposition (FEVD) method with a double regularization on both the underlying vector autoregressive (VAR) parameters and the covariance matrix of the VAR residuals, we are able to address the curse of dimensionality within each estimation. This allows us to examine how vulnerable a company is and how much systemic impact a company has given its specific ESG. Looking at a larger sample of European stocks over the period 2007-2022, we empirically show that both the best and worst ESG performers have the largest impact on the financial system in normal times. However, during a crisis, companies with the best ESG ratings generate significant spillovers throughout the system. These findings highlight the importance of incorporating ESG factors into systemic risk assessments and monitoring companies’ ESG performance to ensure financial stability. Policymakers can benefit from this research by supporting investment in high ESG companies to mitigate relevant spillovers during stressed market conditions, when such companies are more interconnected

This paper explores how banks’ environmental, social, and governance (ESG) activities affect their lending during financial crises. We use a sample of European listed banks with available ESG scores from 2002 to 2020 and consider the global financial crisis of 2007–2009 and the European sovereign debt crisis of 2010–2012. We estimate a two-step system GMM dynamic panel data model and also address potential endogeneity with instrumental variable (IV) and difference-in-difference (DiD) estimations. We find that lending falls to a lesser extent for banks with higher ESG scores during crisis times. Our findings are robust to using alternative ESG rating providers. An investigation of the different potential channels shows that, during crises, banks more engaged in ESG activities are less affected in terms of credit risk, asset risk, and profitability. They also face a lower reduction in market funding, allowing them to downsize to a lesser extent during crises, and their deposit rates do not increase as much as in less ESG-engaged banks. A deeper investigation reveals that our findings mainly hold for banks focused on traditional lending and deposit activities and are essentially driven by the environmental pillar component of ESG scores and the global financial crisis of 2007–2009

Few studies investigate whether ESG mitigates the harmful effects of changes in firms’ external environments. We evidence that ESG mitigated the impact of COVID-19 work-from-home and workplace prescriptions amongst several other pandemic-related government regulatory interventions, even when controlling for firm size. In a novel approach, we apply scrutiny of firms to restrict our cross-national sample to only firms with no cross-border trade, that is, explicitly domestically focused operational processes irrespective of the endpoint of corporate sales, enhancing methodological robustness. Consequently, we isolate an ESG effect. Results indicate the existence of a premium during the onset of each analysed national pandemic experience, particularly pronounced for those corporations that had achieved more substantiative ESG-based preparation and development before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic

We find strong evidence that measures of social responsibility contribute to increasing the resilience of banks. This finding holds when social responsibility is measured by aggregated ESG scores provided by Thomson Reuters, both according to their older Asset 4 categorization and to the reformed ESG Refinitiv classification, and resilience is proxied by various measures of systemic and systematic risk. The results hold on the level of subcategories of the ESG pillars, where we find that, particularly, variables related to the long-term perspective enhance resilience. Moreover, in our international study, we find significant transatlantic differences