ESG Reporting Credibility under Climate Information Shocks and the Role of Board Gender Diversity
気候情報ショック下におけるESG報告の信頼性と取締役会のジェンダー多様性の役割 (AI 翻訳)
Ammad Ahmed, Sumit Dhull, Atia Hussain
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本論文は、気候関連の情報ショック（規制・機会の両面）が企業のESG報告の信頼性（ESGアラインメントで測定）に与える影響を分析。規制・機会イノベーションが悪化すると信頼性が低下し、特に機会イノベーションの影響が強い。取締役会のジェンダー多様性が高い企業ではこの負の効果が緩和される。2001年から2023年の多国籍パネルデータを使用。
English
This paper examines how adverse climate narrative innovations (regulatory and opportunity shocks) affect ESG reporting credibility, measured as ESG alignment. Using a multi-country panel from 2001-2023, it finds that adverse shocks lower alignment, with stronger effects for opportunity innovations. Board gender diversity attenuates this effect. The study highlights the importance of stress indicators and governance in assessing climate reporting quality.
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基準の適用が進む中、気候関連報告の信頼性確保が重要。本論文は、取締役会の多様性が気候情報ショック時の報告信頼性を高める可能性を示唆し、日本のコーポレートガバナンス改革や有報での気候開示に示唆を与える。
In the global GX context
This paper contributes to global disclosure scholarship by proposing a state-contingent approach to climate reporting credibility. It supports ISSB/TCFD frameworks emphasizing governance and stress-testing, and has implications for CSRD and SEC climate disclosure rules. Firms and regulators should consider board diversity as a mechanism to enhance credibility under adverse climate news.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Provides a novel methodology for measuring climate-reporting credibility using narrative shocks and ESG alignment, opening avenues for research on disclosure quality under stress.
🏢実務担当者:Companies can use the findings to strengthen climate-reporting credibility by monitoring narrative innovations and improving board gender diversity.
🏛政策担当者:Suggests that board gender diversity can be a valuable governance mechanism to enhance the credibility of ESG reports, relevant for standard-setting and regulatory design.
📄 Abstract（原文）
Climate reporting is moving into general-purpose reporting, but credibility is most relevant when climate information turns against the firm. We develop a state-contingent view of climate-reporting credibility and test it using regulatory and opportunity shock loads from earnings-call text. The shock loads capture exposure-weighted innovations in theme tone accumulated within the fiscal year and are coded so higher values indicate more adverse narrative innovations. We measure credibility using ESG alignment, a firm-year measure of the consistency between ESG posture in provider performance scores and ESG frictions in controversy indicators, with the controversy measure directionally adjusted so higher values reflect greater frictions. Using a multi-country panel of listed firms from 2001 to 2023, we find that adverse regulatory and opportunity innovations are associated with lower ESG alignment, with stronger effects for opportunity innovations. This association is attenuated when boards are more gender-diverse. Decomposition analyses show that misalignment is driven mainly by weaker ESG scores, while frictions increase more selectively after adverse opportunity innovations. Results are robust to alternative specifications and identification checks. The findings imply that assessing sustainability-reporting quality benefits from stress indicators based on firm-specific climate narrative innovations and governance capacity, rather than relying on average-period disclosure associations.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openaire https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.6446298first seen 2026-05-14 22:17:59
🔔 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。