炭素排出は財務パフォーマンスに影響するか？インド企業における企業規模の調整効果
Do Carbon Emissions Affect Financial Performance? The Moderating Role of Firm Size in Indian Firms (原題)
(著者不明)
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
インドNIFTY200の非金融68社・5会計年度(340社年)を対象に、Scope1+2実排出量と財務指標(ROA/ROE/Tobin's Q)の関係をシステムGMMで検証。排出量が多い企業はROEとTobin's Qが有意に低く、企業規模が大きいほどこの評価ペナルティが緩和される。開示ベースの代理指標ではなく実排出量に基づく投資家リスク評価と規制開示政策の必要性を示唆する。
English
Using two-step system GMM on 68 NIFTY 200 non-financial firms over FY2019–FY2023 (340 firm-years), the study links actual Scope 1+2 emissions to financial performance. Higher emitters show significantly lower ROE and Tobin's Q, while firm size moderates this penalty. It argues for grounding investor risk assessment and disclosure policy in actual emission data rather than proxy indicators.
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
SSBJ基準や有報でのScope1/2開示が進む日本企業にとって、実排出量が財務指標(ROE・企業価値)に反映されるという実証結果は、開示の経済的意義を裏付ける。特に大企業ほど排出ペナルティが緩和される点は、規模別の投資家対応や開示戦略を考える上で示唆的。
In the global GX context
As ISSB/SSBJ standards push mandatory Scope 1+2 disclosure, this paper provides emerging-market evidence that actual emissions—not disclosure proxies—correlate with valuation penalties (ROE, Tobin's Q). It reinforces the global shift toward decision-useful, emissions-based disclosure and highlights firm-size heterogeneity relevant to transition finance and investor risk models.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:新興国における実排出量と財務パフォーマンスの因果的関係をGMMで識別した実証手法が参考になる。
🏢実務担当者:Scope1/2実排出量の削減がROEや企業価値向上に直結しうることを示し、開示・削減投資の正当化材料となる。
🏛政策担当者:開示義務化が実排出量ベースであるべき根拠を提供し、規模別の規制設計を検討する際に有用。
📄 Abstract（原文）
Climate commitments undertaken at the national level raise a concrete question for those running Indian companies: does the carbon a firm physically emits leave a visible mark on its financial results, or is the relationship more symbolic than substantive? This paper takes up that question for 68 non-financial firms drawn from the NIFTY 200 index, tracked across five fiscal years (FY2019–FY2023) to build a panel of 340 firm-year observations, and asks in addition whether the size of a firm changes the answer. Carbon performance is captured as the natural logarithm of combined Scope 1 and Scope 2 greenhouse gas output rather than through a disclosure-based proxy, while financial outcomes are tracked through Return on Assets (ROA), Return on Equity (ROE), and Tobin’s Q. Two-step System Generalised Method of Moments (GMM) estimation addresses the endogeneity and unobserved firm heterogeneity that would otherwise bias a simpler panel regression. The results point toward a measurable financial cost attached to higher emissions: firms emitting more report significantly weaker ROE and a significantly lower Tobin’s Q, though the relationship with ROA does not reach conventional significance. A positive and significant interaction between emissions and firm size indicates that this valuation penalty narrows as firms grow larger, consistent with the idea that bigger firms are simply better resourced to absorb carbon-related market pressure. Taken together, the findings make a case for grounding both investor risk assessment and regulatory disclosure policy in actual emission figures rather than in proxy indicators of environmental intent.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- semanticscholar https://doi.org/10.51879/pijssl/090703first seen 2026-09-12 05:47:17 · last seen 2026-09-21 05:16:29
🔔 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。