企業ライフサイクルと10-K提出書類におけるサステナビリティ開示：平均的シグナリングと局所的正当性
Corporate life cycle and sustainability disclosure in 10-K filings: average signaling, local legitimacy (原題)
(著者不明)
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
米国上場企業2009〜2019年の10-K提出書類を用い、企業ライフサイクル段階がサステナビリティ開示行動に与える影響をテキスト分析で検証。成熟企業はシグナリング理論に沿って開示強度が高い一方、成長段階企業は業績が弱いにもかかわらず開示が多く、正当性理論に沿う行動を示す。開示水準が同じでも動機と経済的基礎が異なることを示し、投資家・規制当局への含意を提示する。
English
Using textual analysis of 10-K filings from US listed firms (2009-2019), this study examines how firm life-cycle stages shape sustainability disclosure. Mature firms disclose more, consistent with signaling theory, while growth-stage firms disclose relatively more despite weaker ESG performance, consistent with legitimacy-driven communication. Signaling and legitimacy operate jointly but unevenly across stages, implying similar disclosure levels can reflect different motivations and fundamentals.
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基準や有価証券報告書でのサステナビリティ開示が拡大する日本では、開示量の多さが必ずしも企業の実態や成熟度を反映しない可能性を示唆する。投資家対応や統合報告書作成において、ライフサイクル段階を踏まえた開示の質的評価の重要性を日本企業に問いかける。
In the global GX context
As ISSB and CSRD push sustainability disclosure into mandatory filings, this paper warns that disclosure intensity alone is a noisy signal of performance. It adds a dynamic, life-cycle lens to global disclosure scholarship, relevant to regulators designing comparability rules and investors interpreting mandatory reports.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:開示理論（シグナリングと正当性）をライフサイクル段階で統合する実証枠組みを提供する。
🏢実務担当者:自社のライフサイクル段階に応じ、開示量ではなく開示の質と整合性を重視すべき示唆を与える。
🏛政策担当者:開示量ベースの比較評価には限界があり、企業段階を考慮した制度設計の必要性を示す。
📄 Abstract（原文）
This study examines how firm life-cycle stages shape sustainability disclosure behavior and investigates whether competing disclosure logics, signaling theory and legitimacy theory, operate differently across stages of corporate development. Using a sample of US listed firms from 2009 to 2019, we analyze sustainability-related language embedded in mandatory 10-K filings. Firm life-cycle stages are proxied using both retained earnings to total assets (RE/TA) and cash-flow–based classifications. Sustainability disclosure intensity is measured through textual analysis of 10-K reports, while sustainability performance is captured using ESG scores. We estimate baseline regressions with industry and year fixed effects and conduct robustness analyses, including alternative life-cycle proxies, propensity score matching, and heteroskedasticity-consistent standard errors. The results show that mature firms exhibit higher sustainability disclosure intensity, consistent with signaling theory: firms with stronger sustainability performance disclose more to credibly convey their quality. However, further analysis reveals meaningful heterogeneity across life-cycle stages. Growth-stage firms display relatively higher sustainability disclosure despite weaker sustainability performance, a pattern consistent with legitimacy-driven communication. Sensitivity analyses based on cash-flow life-cycle classifications further indicate that while legitimacy considerations dominate in specific stage contrasts, signaling incentives prevail at the aggregate level. The findings suggest that sustainability disclosure should be interpreted considering firms' life-cycle positions. Similar disclosure levels may reflect different underlying motivations and economic fundamentals, which has implications for investors, regulators, and other stakeholders. This study integrates firm life-cycle theory with disclosure theories and shows that signaling and legitimacy operate jointly but unevenly across stages of corporate development, offering a dynamic perspective on sustainability disclosure behavior.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- semanticscholar https://doi.org/10.1108/jal-12-2025-0717first seen 2026-09-12 05:24:47 · last seen 2026-09-22 04:58:36
🔔 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。