ガバナンスの規律か象徴的拡大か？フロンティア市場における連続するマクロ危機下でのESG開示に関する三重差の差の差イベントスタディ

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:Provides a novel triple-DDD design for testing cross-shock consistency and a sector-contingent regulatory-floor mechanism to reconcile governance-resilience vs. discipline debates.

🏢実務担当者:Cautions against interpreting smaller crisis-period ESG score gains as governance failure; suggests focusing on quality and regulatory minimums.

🏛政策担当者:Highlights that mandatory disclosure minimums can turn governance from a filter into an amplifier, informing regulatory design in emerging markets.

This paper asks how corporate governance quality shapes ESG (sustainability) disclosure when macroeconomic conditions deteriorate, and whether the relationship differs across crisis types and regulatory environments. It tests a sector-contingent “regulatory-floor” mechanism: governance amplifies disclosure where mandatory minimums exist and constrains breadth expansion where disclosure is discretionary. Three structurally distinct crises — an energy shock (2018–2019), the COVID-19 disruption (2020–2021) and an FX/hyperinflation episode (2022–2023) — serve as repeated natural experiments within one setting: a Pakistan Stock Exchange panel of 95 firms over 2013–2024 (1,080 firm-year observations). The design is a triple difference-in-differences with event-study validation, wild cluster bootstrap inference and sector stratification. The robust result is a sector sign-reversal: financial-sector high-governance firms show positive disclosure interactions across all three crises (COVID β = +2.617, t = 6.93), while non-financial high-governance firms show negative interactions (Energy β = −2.033, p < 0.05). The full-sample “governance discipline” pattern is marginal (DDD β = −1.845 and −1.672; wild-bootstrap p = 0.050 and 0.081) and is reported as suggestive. The disclosure score measures breadth, not verifiability; treatment is universal, so identification rests on within-sample governance heterogeneity; and full-sample significance is marginal with 95 clusters. Interpretations are patterns consistent with the mechanisms, not proof of intent. Mandatory disclosure minimums turn governance from a filter into an amplifier; investors should not read smaller crisis-period ESG-score gains as governance failure, and researchers should pair breadth metrics with quality measures. The repeated-crisis triple-DDD design enables cross-shock consistency testing unavailable to single-crisis studies, and the regulatory-floor mechanism unifies the governance-resilience and governance-discipline accounts under one sector-contingent prediction.

• semanticscholar https://ijbmsjournal.com/index.php/jbmis/article/download/1061/531first seen 2026-09-08 05:30:27 · last seen 2026-09-22 04:59:55