Relationship between Board Characteristics, ESG and Corporate Performance: A Systematic Review

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

In recent years researchers have been paying significant attention to Environmental, Social, Governance (ESG) principles as a crucial factor in company performance. This paper aims to summarize the trends and findings in academic literature devoted to the board of directors as a determinant of ESG performance and non-financial disclosure quality. This paper also summarizes the key findings for a board’s moderating effects on the impact of ESG on corporate financial performance. The results of qualitative analysis of more than 70 empirical papers demonstrate that board independence is the most widely considered parameter, interpreted as a positive factor for strengthening a board’s monitoring function according to agency theory. There is no consensus on board size: larger boards include directors who represent the interests of a wider range of stakeholders (stakeholder theory), however, the increase in board size leads to a complication
of decision-making and controlling processes. Researchers mostly agree that an augmentation of women’ and foreigners’ representation among directors positively affects ESG performance and disclosure quality, although the lack of critical mass may dilute this effect. As for CEO’s role in the board, while some researchers argue that CEO duality enhances agency conflict, deterring corporate transition to ESG, other authors claim that a CEO’s organizational power may enhance the ESG transition due to a faster implementation of board decisions. One of the crucial determinants for this effect is the board members’ diversified professional expertise, including specialized education and experience, for the effective monitoring of managers’ performance. Finally, there is a growing interest in the role of board sustainability committees,
which accumulate the required professional expertise for developing environmental and social strategies (resource-based theory). By examining the key board characteristics’ effect on corporate ESG performance and disclosure quality, this paper contributes to corporate governance literature, expanding the field for further research. Moreover, the paper highlights several understudied issues for further research.

About the authors

K. Popov

Национальный исследовательский университет Высшая школа экономики

Author for correspondence.
Email: kpopov@hse.ru

E. Makeeva

National research university Higher School of Economics

Email: emakeeva@hse.ru

References

  1. Widyawati L. A systematic literature review of socially responsible investment and environmental social governance metrics. Business Strategy and the Environment. 2020;29(2):619-637. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2393 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2393
  2. Ginglinger E., Moreau Q. Climate risk and capital structure. ECGI Working Paper Series in Finance. 2021;(737). URL: https://ecgi.global/sites/default/files/working_papers/documents/ginglingermoreaufinal.pdf
  3. Daugaard D. Emerging new themes in environmental, social and governance investing: A systematic literature review. Accounting & Finance. 2020;60(2):1501-1530. https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.12479 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.12479
  4. Henisz W.J., Dorobantu S., Nartey L.J. Spinning gold: The financial returns to stakeholder engagement. Strategic Management Journal. 2014;35(12):1727-1748. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2180 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2180
  5. Nazarova V., Lavrova V. Do ESG factors influence investment attractiveness of the public companies? Journal of Corporate Finance Research. 2022;16(1):38-64. https://doi.org/10.17323/j.jcfr.2073-0438.16.1.2022.38-64 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17323/j.jcfr.2073-0438.16.1.2022.38-64
  6. Zakmatov D., Vagizova V., Valitov G. Accounting for ESG risks in the discount rate for business valuation. Journal of Corporate Finance Research. 2022;16(1):83-98. https://doi.org/10.17323/j.jcfr.2073-0438.16.1.2022.83-98 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17323/j.jcfr.2073-0438.16.1.2022.83-98
  7. Singh D., Delios A. Corporate governance, board networks and growth in domestic and international markets: Evidence from India. Journal of World Business. 2017;52(5):615-627. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2017.02.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2017.02.002
  8. Jensen M.C., Meckling W.H. Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics. 1976;3(4):305-360. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X
  9. Neville F., Byron K., Post C., Ward A. Board independence and corporate misconduct: A cross-national meta-analysis. Journal of Management. 2019;45(6):2538-2569. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0149206318801999 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206318801999
  10. Ntim C.G., Lindop S., Thomas D.A., Abdou H., Opong K.K. Executive pay and performance: The moderating effect of CEO power and governance structure. The International Journal of Human Resource Management. 2019;30(6):921-963. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2017.1282532 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2017.1282532
  11. Lagasio V., Cucari N. Corporate governance and environmental social governance disclosure: A meta-analytical review. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. 2019;26(4):701-711. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1716 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1716
  12. Harjoto M.A., Laksmana I., Yang Y.-W. Board nationality and educational background diversity and corporate social performance. Corporate Governance. 2019;19(2):217-239. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-04-2018-0138 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-04-2018-0138
  13. Cucari N., Esposito de Falco S., Orlando B. Diversity of board of directors and environmental social governance: Evidence from Italian listed companies. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. 2018;25(3):250-266. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1452 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1452
  14. Campanella F., Serino L., Crisci A., d’Ambra A. The role of corporate governance in environmental policy disclosure and sustainable development. Generalized estimating equations in longitudinal count data analysis. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. 2021;28(1):474-484. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2062 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2062
  15. Hussain N., Rigoni U., Orij R.P. Corporate governance and sustainability performance: Analysis of triple bottom line performance. Journal of Business Ethics. 2018;149(2):411-432. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3099-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3099-5
  16. Naciti V. Corporate governance and board of directors: The effect of a board composition on firm sustainability performance. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2019;237:117727. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.117727 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.117727
  17. Haque F. The effects of board characteristics and sustainable compensation policy on carbon performance of UK firms. The British Accounting Review. 2017;49(3):347-364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2017.01.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2017.01.001
  18. Romano M., Cirillo A., Favino C., Netti A. ESG (Environmental, Social and Governance) performance and board gender diversity: The moderating role of CEO duality. Sustainability. 2020;12(21):9298. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU12219298 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su12219298
  19. Saona P., Muro L., Alvarado M. How do the ownership structure and board of directors' features impact earnings management? The Spanish case. Journal of International Financial Management & Accounting. 2020;31(1):98-133. https://doi.org/10.1111/jifm.12114 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jifm.12114
  20. Arayssi M., Jizi M., Tabaja H.H. The impact of board composition on the level of ESG disclosures in GCC countries. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal. 2020;11(1):137-161. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-05-2018-0136 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-05-2018-0136
  21. Kor Y.Y., Sundaramurthy C. Experience-based human capital and social capital of outside directors. Journal of Management. 2009;35(4):981-1006. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0149206308321551 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308321551
  22. Brown J.A., Anderson A., Salas J.M., Ward A.J. Do investors care about director tenure? Insights from executive cognition and social capital theories. Organization Science. 2017;28(3):471-494. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2017.1123 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2017.1123
  23. Ismail A.M., Latiff I.H.M. Board diversity and corporate sustainability practices: Evidence on environmental, social and governance (ESG) reporting. International Journal of Financial Research. 2019;10(3):31-50. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijfr.v10n3p31 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5430/ijfr.v10n3p31
  24. Govindan K., Kilic M., Uyar A., Karaman A.S. Drivers and value-relevance of CSR performance in the logistics sector: A cross-country firm-level investigation. International Journal of Production Economics. 2021;231:107835. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2020.107835 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2020.107835
  25. Khudhair D.Z., Al-Zubaidi F.K.A., Raji A.A. The effect of board characteristics and audit committee characteristics on audit quality. Management Science Letters. 2019;9(2):271-282. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2018.11.012 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2018.11.012
  26. Tamimi N., Sebastianelli R. Transparency among S&P 500 companies: An analysis of ESG disclosure scores. Management Decision. 2017;55(8):1660-1680. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-01-2017-0018 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-01-2017-0018
  27. Waheed A., Malik Q.A. Board characteristics, ownership concentration and firms’ performance: A contingent theoretical based approach. South Asian Journal of Business Studies. 2019;8(2):146-165. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAJBS-03-2018-0031 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/SAJBS-03-2018-0031
  28. Husted B.W., de Sousa-Filho J.M. Board structure and environmental, social, and governance disclosure in Latin America. Journal of Business Research. 2019;102:220-227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.01.017 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.01.017
  29. Fernández-Temprano M.A., Tejerina-Gaite F. Types of director, board diversity and firm performance. Corporate Governance. 2020;20(2):324-342. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-03-2019-0096 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-03-2019-0096
  30. Merendino A., Melville R. The board of directors and firm performance: empirical evidence from listed companies. Corporate Governance. 2019;19(3):508-551. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-06-2018-0211 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-06-2018-0211
  31. Lara J.M.G., Osma B.G., Mora A., Scapin M. The monitoring role of female directors over accounting quality. Journal of Corporate Finance. 2017;45:651-668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2017.05.016 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2017.05.016
  32. Anazonwu H.O., Egbunike F.C., Gunardi A. Corporate board diversity and sustainability reporting: A study of selected listed manufacturing firms in Nigeria. Indonesian Journal of Sustainability Accounting and Management. 2018;2(1):65-78. https://doi.org/10.28992/ijsam.v2i1.52 DOI: https://doi.org/10.28992/ijsam.v2i1.52
  33. Naveed K., Voinea C.L., Ali Z., Rauf F., Fratostiteanu C. Board gender diversity and corporate social performance in different industry groups: Evidence from China. Sustainability. 2021;13(6):3142. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU13063142 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063142
  34. Nicolò G., Zampone G., Sannino G., de Iorio S. Sustainable corporate governance and non-financial disclosure in Europe: Does the gender diversity matter? Journal of Applied Accounting Research. 2022;23(1):227-249. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAAR-04-2021-0100 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JAAR-04-2021-0100
  35. Venturelli A., Caputo F., Leopizzi R., Pizzi S. The state of art of corporate social disclosure before the introduction of non-financial reporting directive: A cross-country analysis. Social Responsibility Journal. 2019;15(4):409-423. https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-12-2017-0275 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-12-2017-0275
  36. Wasiuzzaman S., Wan Mohammad W.M. Board gender diversity and transparency of environmental, social and governance disclosure: Evidence from Malaysia. Managerial and Decision Economics. 2020;41(1):145-156. https://doi.org/10.1002/MDE.3099 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/mde.3099
  37. Harjoto M.A., Wang Y. Board of directors network centrality and environmental, social and governance (ESG) performance. Corporate Governance. 2020;20(6):965-985. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-10-2019-0306 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-10-2019-0306
  38. Shakil M.H. Environmental, social and governance performance and financial risk: Moderating role of ESG controversies and board gender diversity. Resources Policy. 2021;72:102144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2021.102144 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2021.102144
  39. Kanter R.M. Men and women of the corporation. New York: Basic Books; 1993. 416 p.
  40. de Masi S., Słomka-Gołębiowska A., Becagli C., Paci A. Toward sustainable corporate behavior: The effect of the critical mass of female directors on environmental, social, and governance disclosure. Business Strategy and the Environment. 2021;30(4):1865-1878. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2721 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2721
  41. Manita R., Bruna M.G., Dang R., Houanti L. Board gender diversity and ESG disclosure: Evidence from the USA. Journal of Applied Accounting Research. 2018;19(2):206-224. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAAR-01-2017-0024 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JAAR-01-2017-0024
  42. McGuinness P.B., Vieito J.P., Wang M. Proactive government intervention, board gender balance, and stakeholder engagement in China and Europe. Asia Pacific Journal of Management. 2020;37(3):719-762. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-018-9611-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-018-9611-y
  43. Fahad P., Mubarak Rahman P. Impact of corporate governance on CSR disclosure. International Journal of Disclosure and Governance. 2020;17(2-3):155-167. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41310-020-00082-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41310-020-00082-1
  44. Majeed S., Aziz T., Saleem S. The effect of corporate governance elements on corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure: An empirical evidence from listed companies at KSE Pakistan. International Journal of Financial Studies. 2015;3(4):530-556. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijfs3040530 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijfs3040530
  45. Potapova A., Wang Z., Steblyanskaya A. The impact of corporate social responsibility on the company’s financial performance. Journal of Corporate Finance Research. 2021;15(4):18-35. https://doi.org/10.17323/j.jcfr.2073-0438.15.4.2021.18-35 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17323/j.jcfr.2073-0438.15.4.2021.18-35
  46. Lu J., Wang J. Corporate governance, law, culture, environmental performance and CSR disclosure: A global perspective. Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money. 2021;70:101264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intfin.2020.101264 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intfin.2020.101264
  47. Beji R., Yousfi O., Loukil N., Omri A. Board diversity and corporate social responsibility: Empirical evidence from France. Journal of Business Ethics. 2021;173(1):133-155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04522-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04522-4
  48. Miletkov M., Poulsen A., Wintoki M.B. Foreign independent directors and the quality of legal institutions. Journal of International Business Studies. 2017;48(2):267-292. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-016-0033-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-016-0033-0
  49. Liao L., Lin T., Zhang Y. Corporate board and corporate social responsibility assurance: Evidence from China. Journal of Business Ethics. 2018;150(1):211-225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3176-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3176-9
  50. Fedaseyeu V., Linck J.S., Wagner H.F. Do qualifications matter? New evidence on board functions and director compensation. Journal of Corporate Finance. 2018;48:816-839. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2017.12.009 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2017.12.009
  51. Faleye O., Hoitash R., Hoitash U. Industry expertise on corporate boards. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting. 2018;50(2):441-479. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11156-017-0635-z DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11156-017-0635-z
  52. Fernández-Gago R., Cabeza-Garcia L., Nieto M. Independent directors’ background and CSR disclosure. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. 2018;25(5):991-1001. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1515 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1515
  53. Ramón-Llorens M.C., Garcia-Meca E., Pucheta-Martinez M.C. The role of human and social board capital in driving CSR reporting. Long Range Planning. 2019;52(6):101846. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2018.08.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2018.08.001
  54. Homroy S., Slechten A. Do board expertise and networked boards affect environmental performance? Journal of Business Ethics. 2019;158(1):269-292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3769-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3769-y
  55. Jamil A., Mohd Ghazali N.A., Puat Nelson S. The influence of corporate governance structure on sustainability reporting in Malaysia. Social Responsibility Journal. 2021;17(8):1251-1278. https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-08-2020-0310 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-08-2020-0310
  56. Wang R., Zhou S., Wang T. Corporate governance, integrated reporting and the use of credibility-enhancing mechanisms on integrated reports. European Accounting Review. 2020;29(4):631-663. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638180.2019.1668281 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09638180.2019.1668281
  57. Bernile G., Bhagwat V., Yonker S. Board diversity, firm risk, and corporate policies. Journal of Financial Economics. 2018;127(3):588-612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2017.12.009 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2017.12.009
  58. Mustafa A.S., Che-Ahmad A., Chandren S. Board diversity, audit committee characteristics and audit quality: The moderating role of control-ownership wedge. Business and Economic Horizons. 2018;14(3):587-614. https://doi.org/10.15208/beh.2018.42 DOI: https://doi.org/10.15208/beh.2018.42
  59. Oh W.-Y., Chang Y.K., Jung R. Board characteristics and corporate social responsibility: Does family involvement in management matter? Journal of Business Research. 2019;103:23-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.05.028 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.05.028
  60. Katmon N., Mohamad Z.Z., Norwani N.M., Al Farooque O. Comprehensive board diversity and quality of corporate social responsibility disclosure: Evidence from an emerging market. Journal of Business Ethics. 2019;157(4):447-481. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3672-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3672-6
  61. Harjoto M.A., Laksmana I., Lee R. Board diversity and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics. 2015;132(4):641-660. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2343-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2343-0
  62. Jouber H. Is the effect of board diversity on CSR diverse? New insights from one-tier vs two-tier corporate board models. Corporate Governance. 2021;21(1):23-61. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-07-2020-0277 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-07-2020-0277
  63. Rao K., Tilt C. Board diversity and CSR reporting: An Australian study. Meditari Accountancy Research. 2016;24(2):182-210. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-08-2015-0052 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-08-2015-0052
  64. Li N., Wahid A.S. Director tenure diversity and board monitoring effectiveness. Contemporary Accounting Research. 2018;35(3):1363-1394. https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12332 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12332
  65. Rossi M., Chouaibi J., Chouaibi S., Jilani W., Chouaibi Y. Does a board characteristic moderate the relationship between CSR practices and financial performance? Evidence from European ESG firms. Journal of Risk and Financial Management. 2021;14(8):354. https://doi.org/10.3390/JRFM14080354 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm14080354
  66. Nekhili M., Boukadhaba A., Nagati H. The ESG–financial performance relationship: Does the type of employee board representation matter? Corporate Governance. 2021;29(2):134-161. https://doi.org/10.1111/corg.12345 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/corg.12345
  67. Tang Y., Mack D.Z., Chen G. The differential effects of CEO narcissism and hubris on corporate social responsibility. Strategic Management Journal. 2018;39(5):1370-1387. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2761 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2761
  68. Velte P. Does CEO power moderate the link between ESG performance and financial performance? A focus on the German two-tier system. Management Research Review. 2020;43(5):497-520. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-04-2019-0182 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-04-2019-0182
  69. Suttipun M. The influence of board composition on environmental, social and governance (ESG) disclosure of Thai listed companies. International Journal of Disclosure and Governance. 2021;18(4):391-402. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41310-021-00120-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41310-021-00120-6
  70. Muttakin M.B., Khan A., Mihret D.G. The effect of board capital and CEO power on corporate social responsibility disclosures. Journal of Business Ethics. 2018;150(1):41-56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3105-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3105-y
  71. Evdokimova M. Innovations creation process: CEO and board of directors roles. Journal of Corporate Finance Research. 2021;15(4):88-101. https://doi.org/10.17323/j.jcfr.2073-0438.15.4.2021.88-101 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17323/j.jcfr.2073-0438.15.4.2021.88-101
  72. Li Y., Gong M., Zhang X.-Y., Koh L. The impact of environmental, social, and governance disclosure on firm value: The role of CEO power. The British Accounting Review. 2018;50(1):60-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2017.09.007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2017.09.007
  73. Martínez-Ferrero J., Lozano M.B., Vivas M. The impact of board cultural diversity on a firm’s commitment toward the sustainability issues of emerging countries: The mediating effect of a CSR committee. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. 2021;28(2):675-685. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2080 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2080
  74. Del Valle I.D., Esteban J.M.D., de Foronda Pérez O.L. Corporate social responsibility and sustainability committee inside the board. European Journal of International Management. 2019;13(2):159-176. https://doi.org/10.1504/EJIM.2019.098145 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1504/EJIM.2019.098145
  75. García-Sánchez I.-M., Gallego-Álvarez I., Zafra-Gómez J.-L. Do independent, female and specialist directors promote eco-innovation and eco-design in agri-food firms? Business Strategy and the Environment. 2021;30(2):1136-1152. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2676 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2676
  76. Uyar A., Kilic M., Koseoglu A., Kuzey C., Karaman A.S. The link among board characteristics, corporate social responsibility performance, and financial performance: Evidence from the hospitality and tourism industry. Tourism Management Perspectives. 2020;35:100714. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2020.100714 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2020.100714
  77. Shahbaz M., Karaman A.S., Kilic M., Uyar A. Board attributes, CSR engagement, and corporate performance: What is the nexus in the energy sector? Energy Policy. 2020;143:111582. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111582 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111582
  78. Vitolla, F., Raimo, N., Marrone, A., Rubino, M. The role of board of directors in intellectual capital disclosure after the advent of integrated reporting. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. 2020;27(5):2188-2200. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1957 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1957
  79. Vitolla F., Raimo N., Rubino M. Board characteristics and integrated reporting quality: an agency theory perspective. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. 2020;27(2):1152-1163. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1879 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1879
  80. Eberhardt-Toth E. Who should be on a board corporate social responsibility committee? Journal of Cleaner Production. 2017;140(Pt.3):1926-1935. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.08.127 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.08.127
  81. Al-Shaer H., Zaman M. Credibility of sustainability reports: The contribution of audit committee. Business Strategy and the Environment. 2018;27(7):973-986. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2046 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2046
  82. Bravo F., Reguera-Alvarado N. Sustainable development disclosure: Environmental, social, and governance reporting and gender diversity in the audit committee. Business Strategy and the Environment. 2019;28(2):418-429. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2258 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2258
  83. Oradi J., Izadi J. Audit committee gender diversity and financial reporting: evidence from restatements. Managerial Auditing Journal. 2020;35(1):67-92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MAJ-10-2018-2048 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/MAJ-10-2018-2048

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

Copyright (c) 2022 Popov K., Makeeva E.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.