Does Disclosure Type Matter? Climate‐Related Financial Disclosures and Corporate Performance
開示の種類は重要か？気候関連財務情報開示と企業パフォーマンス (AI 翻訳)
Alexander Ryota Keeley, Jun Xie, Chao Li, Masaaki Nagamura, Shunsuke Managi
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本研究は、気候関連財務情報開示の財務的影響を、定量的開示と定性的開示に分けて分析。2019〜2023年の東証プライム市場上場企業のパネルデータを用いた差分の差分法により、定量的開示はROA向上と株主資本コスト低減に繋がる一方、定性的開示の効果は弱いことを示した。特にSASBの財務重要性基準に該当する業種でのScope 3排出開示は、初期に収益性低下をもたらすが、その後市場評価と加重平均資本コストの改善に寄与する。
English
This study examines the financial implications of climate-related disclosures, distinguishing quantitative from qualitative. Using a difference-in-differences approach on Japanese TSE Prime Market firms from 2019-2023, it finds quantitative disclosures are linked to higher ROA and lower cost of equity, while qualitative effects are weaker. Scope 3 GHG emissions disclosures in financially material sectors initially reduce profitability but later improve market valuation and reduce weighted average cost of capital.
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（サステナビリティ基準委員会）が気候関連開示基準を策定中であり、本論文は開示の質（定量vs定性）が企業価値に与える影響を実証。投資家が検証可能な定量情報を重視することを示し、SSBJ基準の設計に示唆を与える。また、有報や統合報告書での開示実務において、定性開示にとどまらず数値開示の重要性を強調する。
In the global GX context
Globally, the ISSB and TCFD frameworks emphasize both qualitative and quantitative disclosures. This paper provides empirical evidence that quantitative disclosures have stronger financial effects, supporting the push for granular, verifiable climate data. The Japan-specific dataset adds to the global literature on the real effects of disclosure regulation, particularly relevant for the SEC climate rule and CSRD implementation.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Highlights the differential impact of quantitative vs qualitative climate disclosures using a rigorous quasi-experimental design, valuable for disclosure effectiveness literature.
🏢実務担当者:Confirms that investing in quantitative climate data measurement and disclosure (especially Scope 3) can improve financial metrics over time, guiding corporate disclosure strategy.
🏛政策担当者:Provides evidence that mandatory quantitative disclosure requirements may yield greater capital-market benefits than qualitative-only requirements, informing standard-setting bodies like ISSB and SSBJ.
📄 Abstract（原文）
ABSTRACT Our study examines the financial implications of corporate climate‐related financial disclosures while distinguishing between quantitative and qualitative disclosures. We use a multiple‐period difference‐in‐differences approach to analyze Japanese firms listed on the Tokyo Stock Exchange Prime Market from 2019 to 2023. The findings show that quantitative disclosures are linked to stronger firm performance, reflected in a higher return on assets and lower cost of equity. In contrast, qualitative disclosures have weaker financial effects, suggesting that investors favor concrete, verifiable information. Further analysis shows that disclosing Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions—particularly in industries deemed financially material for climate risks by the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board—is initially associated with lower profitability but eventually leads to higher market valuation and reduced weighted average cost of capital. The results emphasize precise, performance‐based disclosures in informing investor decisions and shaping policies.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- crossref https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.71121first seen 2026-06-16 05:31:45
🔔 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。