{"title":"Mandatory Versus Voluntary GHG Emissions Disclosures and Credit Risk","authors":"Anis Maaloul, Matt Wegener","doi":"10.1080/0969160X.2021.2018001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The aim of this study is to examine the effect of GHG emission performance, as disclosed through voluntary versus mandatory channels, on credit risk (credit ratings and cost of debt). Two different channels are examined: voluntary disclosures made through the CDP and mandatory disclosures made through the EPA. Using a sample of US S&P 500 firms that have voluntarily/mandatorily disclosed their GHG emissions from 2010 to 2016, our results show that GHG emissions disclosures made through both channels have a negative effect on S&P credit ratings. These results imply that credit rating agencies incorporate GHG emissions in their credit assessment of a firm. However, our results show that only the GHG emissions mandatorily disclosed have a significant effect on cost of debt. These results imply that US lenders take into account, in their own lending decisions, only mandatory GHG emissions disclosures made through the EPA and not the voluntary ones made through the CDP. Additional analyses shows that these results are driven by firms in carbon intensive sectors and by firms with speculative grade ratings/high cost of debt. Overall, we conclude that credit market participants (credit rating agencies and creditors), as major stakeholders, make firms accountable for their carbon profile.","PeriodicalId":38053,"journal":{"name":"Social and Environmental Accountability Journal","volume":"42 1","pages":"63 - 92"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social and Environmental Accountability Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0969160X.2021.2018001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Business, Management and Accounting","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
Abstract
ABSTRACT The aim of this study is to examine the effect of GHG emission performance, as disclosed through voluntary versus mandatory channels, on credit risk (credit ratings and cost of debt). Two different channels are examined: voluntary disclosures made through the CDP and mandatory disclosures made through the EPA. Using a sample of US S&P 500 firms that have voluntarily/mandatorily disclosed their GHG emissions from 2010 to 2016, our results show that GHG emissions disclosures made through both channels have a negative effect on S&P credit ratings. These results imply that credit rating agencies incorporate GHG emissions in their credit assessment of a firm. However, our results show that only the GHG emissions mandatorily disclosed have a significant effect on cost of debt. These results imply that US lenders take into account, in their own lending decisions, only mandatory GHG emissions disclosures made through the EPA and not the voluntary ones made through the CDP. Additional analyses shows that these results are driven by firms in carbon intensive sectors and by firms with speculative grade ratings/high cost of debt. Overall, we conclude that credit market participants (credit rating agencies and creditors), as major stakeholders, make firms accountable for their carbon profile.
期刊介绍:
Social and Environmental Accountability Journal (SEAJ) is the official Journal of The Centre for Social and Environmental Accounting Research. It is a predominantly refereed Journal committed to the creation of a new academic literature in the broad field of social, environmental and sustainable development accounting, accountability, reporting and auditing. The Journal provides a forum for a wide range of different forms of academic and academic-related communications whose aim is to balance honesty and scholarly rigour with directness, clarity, policy-relevance and novelty. SEAJ welcomes all contributions that fulfil the criteria of the journal, including empirical papers, review papers and essays, manuscripts reporting or proposing engagement, commentaries and polemics, and reviews of articles or books. A key feature of SEAJ is that papers are shorter than the word length typically anticipated in academic journals in the social sciences. A clearer breakdown of the proposed word length for each type of paper in SEAJ can be found here.