Environmental, Social, and Governance Information Disclosure: Who Discloses Wins?

IF 13.2 1区管理学 Q1 BUSINESS

Business Strategy and The Environment Pub Date : 2026-09-30 DOI:10.1002/bse.71603

Siqi Wang, Jun‐Hwa Cheah, Christoph Wu, Weng Marc Lim

{"title":"Environmental, Social, and Governance Information Disclosure: Who Discloses Wins?","authors":"Siqi Wang, Jun‐Hwa Cheah, Christoph Wu, Weng Marc Lim","doi":"10.1002/bse.71603","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Information Disclosure (ESG‐ID) transitions from voluntary to mandatory disclosure, its drivers and impacts have become focal points of discussion. Existing research, however, lacks integration, which, in turn, has led to fragmented theoretical and practical insights. This study conducts a multi‐layered systematic literature review on ESG‐ID following the Scientific Procedures and Rationales for Systematic Literature Reviews (SPAR‐4‐SLR) protocol. At Layer 1, a broad bibliometric analysis is performed on 1507 articles retrieved from Scopus and Web of Science to delineate the field's developmental trajectory. At Layer 2, a TCCM‐ADO‐based content analysis is applied to 437 articles published in ABDC A*/A‐ranked journals, uncovering the theoretical underpinnings (T), contextual settings (C), characteristic patterns (C), and methodological approaches (M) that inform ESG‐ID research while simultaneously examining the antecedents (A), disclosure decisions (D), and outcomes (O) of ESG‐ID. Through this review, an integrated knowledge framework was established to serve as a reference point for the theoretical advancement and practical application of ESG‐ID. Notably, the framework posits that firms' ESG disclosure choices regarding strategy, form, and quality are driven and impeded by internal and external antecedents . These choices translate into economic, informational, and relational outcomes through specific transmission mechanisms. Key mediators include analyst attention, corporate culture, financing constraints, green innovation, information transparency, and profit sustainability. Disclosure effectiveness may be conditioned by key moderators such as ownership structure, digital transformation, industry exposure, and public attention. However, the positive impact of ESG‐ID is not universal, as such disclosure may lose its effectiveness or even lead to negative consequences when assurance is insufficient or greenwashing is detected.","PeriodicalId":9518,"journal":{"name":"Business Strategy and The Environment","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Business Strategy and The Environment","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.71603","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

As Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Information Disclosure (ESG‐ID) transitions from voluntary to mandatory disclosure, its drivers and impacts have become focal points of discussion. Existing research, however, lacks integration, which, in turn, has led to fragmented theoretical and practical insights. This study conducts a multi‐layered systematic literature review on ESG‐ID following the Scientific Procedures and Rationales for Systematic Literature Reviews (SPAR‐4‐SLR) protocol. At Layer 1, a broad bibliometric analysis is performed on 1507 articles retrieved from Scopus and Web of Science to delineate the field's developmental trajectory. At Layer 2, a TCCM‐ADO‐based content analysis is applied to 437 articles published in ABDC A*/A‐ranked journals, uncovering the theoretical underpinnings (T), contextual settings (C), characteristic patterns (C), and methodological approaches (M) that inform ESG‐ID research while simultaneously examining the antecedents (A), disclosure decisions (D), and outcomes (O) of ESG‐ID. Through this review, an integrated knowledge framework was established to serve as a reference point for the theoretical advancement and practical application of ESG‐ID. Notably, the framework posits that firms' ESG disclosure choices regarding strategy, form, and quality are driven and impeded by internal and external antecedents . These choices translate into economic, informational, and relational outcomes through specific transmission mechanisms. Key mediators include analyst attention, corporate culture, financing constraints, green innovation, information transparency, and profit sustainability. Disclosure effectiveness may be conditioned by key moderators such as ownership structure, digital transformation, industry exposure, and public attention. However, the positive impact of ESG‐ID is not universal, as such disclosure may lose its effectiveness or even lead to negative consequences when assurance is insufficient or greenwashing is detected.

查看原文本刊更多论文

环境、社会和治理信息披露：谁是披露的赢家？

随着环境、社会与治理（ESG）信息披露（ESG - ID）从自愿披露向强制性披露转变，其驱动因素和影响已成为讨论的焦点。然而，现有研究缺乏整合，这反过来又导致了理论和实践见解的碎片化。本研究按照系统文献综述的科学程序和基本原理（SPAR‐4‐SLR）协议对ESG‐ID进行了多层次的系统文献综述。在第1层，对从Scopus和Web of Science检索的1507篇文章进行了广泛的文献计量分析，以描绘该领域的发展轨迹。在第2层，基于TCCM‐ADO‐的内容分析应用于发表在ABDC a */ a‐排名期刊上的437篇文章，揭示理论基础(T)，上下文设置(C)，特征模式(C)和方法方法(M)，这些方法为ESG‐ID研究提供信息，同时检查ESG‐ID的前提(a)，披露决策(D)和结果(O)。通过本文的综述，我们建立了一个完整的知识框架，为ESG‐ID的理论发展和实际应用提供参考。值得注意的是，该框架假设公司关于战略、形式和质量的ESG披露选择受到内部和外部前因的驱动和阻碍。这些选择通过特定的传导机制转化为经济、信息和关系上的结果。主要中介因素包括分析师关注、企业文化、融资约束、绿色创新、信息透明度和利润可持续性。披露有效性可能受到股权结构、数字化转型、行业曝光和公众关注等关键调节因素的制约。然而，ESG - ID的积极影响并不是普遍的，因为当保证不足或发现“漂绿”时，此类披露可能会失去其有效性，甚至导致负面后果。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Business Strategy and The Environment Multiple-

CiteScore

22.50

自引率

19.40%

发文量

336

期刊介绍： Business Strategy and the Environment (BSE) is a leading academic journal focused on business strategies for improving the natural environment. It publishes peer-reviewed research on various topics such as systems and standards, environmental performance, disclosure, eco-innovation, corporate environmental management tools, organizations and management, supply chains, circular economy, governance, green finance, industry sectors, and responses to climate change and other contemporary environmental issues. The journal aims to provide original contributions that enhance the understanding of sustainability in business. Its target audience includes academics, practitioners, business managers, and consultants. However, BSE does not accept papers on corporate social responsibility (CSR), as this topic is covered by its sibling journal Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. The journal is indexed in several databases and collections such as ABI/INFORM Collection, Agricultural & Environmental Science Database, BIOBASE, Emerald Management Reviews, GeoArchive, Environment Index, GEOBASE, INSPEC, Technology Collection, and Web of Science.