グリーン会計・グリーンファイナンスと企業価値：エネルギー企業におけるESG開示の調整効果
Green Accounting, Green Finance, and Firm Value: The Moderating Role of ESG Disclosure in Energy Firms (原題)
Khairil Pajeri, Afrijal, Hendry Kurniawan
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
インドネシア証券取引所のエネルギー49社・210社年を対象に、グリーン会計とグリーンファイナンスが企業価値（Tobin's Q）に与える影響とESG開示の調整効果を検証。3つの開示変はいずれも企業価値に直接効果を持たず、ESG開示はグリーン会計と企業価値の関係を弱めるが10%水準にとどまり頑健性も限定的。グリーンファイナンス経路への調整効果は確認されず、開示の広さは未だ価値シグナルとして評価されていないと結論づける。
English
Using 49 Indonesian energy firms (210 firm-years, 2021–2025), this study tests whether green accounting and green finance affect firm value (Tobin's Q) and whether ESG disclosure moderates these links. None of the three disclosure variables has a direct effect on firm value; ESG disclosure weakens the green accounting–value link only weakly (10% level, limited robustness) and does not moderate the green finance path. Breadth of sustainability disclosure is not yet priced as a value signal in this sector.
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
インドネシアのSEOJK・POJK・サステナブルファイナンス分類体系を題材に、開示の広さが企業価値に織り込まれるかを検証した点は、SSBJ基準の任意適用開始後の日本企業が「開示の質と市場評価」を考える上で示唆的。開示量より質・投資家対話が重要という示唆は有報・統合報告書対応にも通じる。
In the global GX context
This paper speaks directly to the global debate on whether ISSB/CSRD-style disclosure mandates translate into valuation effects, offering emerging-market evidence that disclosure breadth alone is not yet priced. It adds a cautionary data point for transition-finance and disclosure-infrastructure scholarship: regulatory alignment (POJK, taxonomy, Green Bond Principles) does not automatically produce a market premium.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Provides a moderated-regression template and emerging-market evidence on the disclosure–value link, useful for comparative studies against ISSB/CSRD jurisdictions.
🏢実務担当者:Suggests that expanding disclosure item counts alone may not move valuation; quality and investor relevance of ESG disclosure matter more.
🏛政策担当者:Indicates that mandating broader sustainability reporting may not yield market pricing effects without complementary enforcement and investor-demand measures.
📄 Abstract（原文）
Indonesia has steadily widened sustainability reporting duties for listed companies, yet the market value of energy issuers during 2021–2025 followed commodity prices far more closely than it followed disclosure. This study examines whether green accounting and green finance affect firm value and whether ESG disclosure moderates these links. The sample covers 49 Energy-sector companies (IDX-IC) on the Indonesia Stock Exchange, giving 210 firm-year observations in an unbalanced panel. Firm value is proxied by Tobin's Q. Green accounting is measured with 31 GRI 300 items, green finance with a ten-item index built from POJK 51/2017, the Indonesian Sustainable Finance Taxonomy, and the Green Bond Principles, and ESG disclosure with 38 items from Appendix II of SEOJK 16/SEOJK.04/2021. The hypotheses are tested with moderated regression analysis on a random-effects model with firm-clustered errors and a wild cluster bootstrap. None of the three disclosure variables shows a direct effect on firm value. ESG disclosure weakens the link between green accounting and Tobin's Q, mostly among coal producers, but the evidence is limited: it holds only at the 10% level under the bootstrap and fails several robustness checks. ESG disclosure does not moderate the green finance path. In this sector, the breadth of sustainability disclosure is not yet priced as a value signal.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.70610/jcpa.2257first seen 2026-11-15 05:26:22
🔔 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。