ESGスコアと企業価値：制度的文脈の役割—米国とEUの比較分析
ESG Score and Firm Value: The Role of the Institutional Context—A Comparative Analysis of the United States and the European Union (原題)
Paolo Maccarrone, Renato Della Cioppa
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
ESGパフォーマンスと企業価値の関係が米国とEUで異なるかを検証した研究。LSEGデータ（2016〜2024年、874社・5848観測）を用いた固定効果パネル回帰を実施。米国企業では2022年まで効果がほぼゼロ、2023年に正で有意となる一方、EU企業ではいずれの年も有意でなかった。地域間の差は全 robustness チェックでも棄却され、開示義務の強弱が関係性に影響する可能性を示唆する。
English
This study tests whether the ESG–firm value relationship differs between the US and EU, two mature markets differing in mandated sustainability disclosure. Using LSEG data (2016–2024, 874 firms, 5,848 observations) and firm fixed-effects panel regressions, the association is near zero for US firms until 2022 and positive and significant in 2023, while insignificant for EU firms in all years. The regional differential is robustly rejected, suggesting disclosure-mandate stringency shapes the ESG–value link.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
日本ではSSBJ基準の確定と有報でのサステナビリティ開示義務化が進む中、開示制度の厳格度がESGと企業価値の関係に与える影響は、日本企業の開示戦略や投資家対応を考える上で直接的な示唆を持つ。EUの義務的開示下でESG評価の価値シグナルが弱まるという知見は、日本が制度設計を進める際の重要な参照点となる。
In the global GX context
As ISSB/SSBJ-aligned mandatory disclosure expands globally, this paper offers rare cross-regional evidence that regulatory stringency may attenuate the ESG–value association—relevant to CSRD implementation debates and to investors pricing ESG under differing disclosure regimes. It adds empirical grounding to the question of whether mandatory disclosure changes the information content of ESG scores.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:ESGと企業価値の関係が制度文脈に依存することを示す頑健な地域比較証拠として、開示規制の内生性を扱う研究設計の参考になる。
🏢実務担当者:EU拠点企業ではESGスコアの価値向上効果が限定的である可能性を踏まえ、開示対応の投資対効果を制度環境別に評価する視点を提供する。
🏛政策担当者:開示義務の強化がESG評価の価値シグナルを弱めうるという示唆は、SSBJ/CSRD等の制度設計と投資家活用のバランスを検討する際の論点となる。
📄 Abstract（原文）
The relationship between ESG performance and firm value is contested and appears to depend on context. This study asks whether that relationship differs between the United States and the European Union, two mature markets that differ primarily in the extent to which sustainability disclosure is mandated. Firm fixed-effects panel regressions are estimated on LSEG (Refinitiv) data for 2016–2024, covering 874 firms and 5848 firm-year observations, with firm value measured by winsorized Tobin’s Q in levels. Among U.S. firms, the estimated association is indistinguishable from zero until 2022 and positive and significant in 2023; among EU firms, it is not significant in any year. The joint hypothesis that the regional differentials are zero in every year is rejected and remains rejected under every robustness check, including the logarithm of Enterprise Value, a lagged ESG score and alternative control sets; the test concerns the period as a whole and does not identify individual years. Functional-form criteria retain linearity, and the turning point implied by a quadratic specification cannot be located on the ESG scale. A direct test of equality across sectors is weak. Institutional context is proxied by region; regulatory stringency and market sentiment are not measured, so the mechanism is not tested.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm19100825first seen 2026-10-21 04:45:16
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。