Çevresel ve Sürdürülebilirlik Zorlukları Bağlamında Kurumsal Yönetişim ve Finansal Performans: Bibliyometrik Bir Analiz (2015-2025)

Abstract

Amaç – Bu araştırma, 2015–2025 döneminde çevresel ve sürdürülebilirlik sorunları bağlamında kurumsal yönetim ile finansal performans arasındaki ilişkinin bilimsel literatürdeki gelişimini sistematik ve metodik bir biçimde haritalandırmayı amaçlamaktadır. Çalışma, yönetişim mekanizmalarının sürdürülebilirlik baskılarına nasıl uyum sağladığını ve bu uyumun firmaların finansal sonuçları ile uzun vadeli dayanıklılığı üzerindeki etkilerini açıklamayı hedeflemektedir. Tasarım/veri/metodoloji – Bu çalışmada, Scopus veri tabanından elde edilen 609 hakemli makaleden oluşan bir veri setine dayanan bibliyometrik bir araştırma tasarımı benimsenmiştir. Alanın yayın eğilimlerini ve entelektüel yapısını ortaya koymak amacıyla ortak atıf analizi, ortak yazarlık analizi ve anahtar kelime (co-word) analizi gibi bilimsel haritalama teknikleri kullanılmıştır. Bulgular – Bulgular, yıllık %37,02 oranında güçlü ve doğrusal olmayan bir büyüme hızına işaret etmekte ve özellikle 2019 sonrasında sürdürülebilirlik odaklı yönetişime yönelik küresel yönelimi yansıtan belirgin bir ivmelenme göstermektedir. Bilgi üretiminin coğrafyası çok kutuplu bir yapı sergilemekte olup, Çin uluslararası araştırma iş birliği ağında açık biçimde merkezi bir düğüm olarak öne çıkmaktadır. Tematik evrim analizi, kavramsal perspektiflerde paradigmatik bir dönüşüme işaret etmekte; yönetişimin parçalı yaklaşımlardan ESG ile uyumlu bütünleşik yaklaşımlara doğru evrildiğini ortaya koymaktadır. Özgünlük/değer – Bu çalışma, hızla genişleyen bir araştırma alanına ilişkin özlü ve sistematik bir bibliyometrik sentez sunmakta; alanın entelektüel ve tematik evrimini netleştirmekte ve kurumsal yönetimin çevresel ve sürdürülebilirlik zorlukları altında yalnızca prosedürel bir işlev olmaktan çıkarak finansal değerin temel belirleyicilerinden biri hâline geldiğini göstermektedir.

Keywords

• kurumsal yönetim
• finansal performans
• sürdürülebilirlik

Corporate Governance and Financial Performance Under Environmental and Sustainability Challenges: A Bibliometric Analysis (2015-2025)

Abstract

Purpose – This research seeks to methodically chart or trace the development of scientific research regarding the linkage between corporate governance and financial performance in the background of environmental and sustainability issues from the year 2015 to 2025. It seeks to clarify how governance mechanisms have adapted to sustainability pressures and how these adaptations affect firms’ financial outcomes and long-term resilience. Design/data/methodology – In this scenario, a bibliometric research design will be used for this research as it will involve a data set of 609 peer-reviewed articles retrievable from the Scopus database. Scientists mapping methods such as co-citation analysis, co-author analysis, and co-word analysis have been employed to understand publishing trends in this field. Findings – Our findings show a strong and non-linear annual growth rate of 37.02%, with a sharp acceleration after 2019, reflecting the global turn toward sustainability-oriented governance. The geography of knowledge production is multipolar, and China has unmistakably emerged as a core node in the network of international research collaboration. Thematic evolution analysis offers clear signals of paradigmatic changes in conceptual perspectives: from fragmented to integrated approaches of governance ESG-aligned. Originality/value – This research provides a concise bibliometric synthesis of a rapidly expanding field, clarifying its intellectual and thematic evolution, and demonstrates that corporate governance has moved beyond a procedural role to become a key driver of financial value under environmental and sustainability challenges.

Keywords

• corporate governance
• financial performance
• sustainability

References

1. Aboud, A., & Diab, A. (2018). The impact of social, environmental and corporate governance disclosures on firm value: evidence from Egypt. Journal of Accounting in Emerging Economies, 8(4), 442–458. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAEE-08-2017-0079
2. Adams, R. B., & Ferreira, D. (2009). Women in the boardroom and their impact on governance and performance. Journal of Financial Economics, 94(2), 291‑309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2008.10.007
3. Adu, D. A., Abedin, M. Z., Saa, V. Y., & Boateng, F. (2024). Bank sustainability, climate change initiatives and financial performance: the role of corporate governance. International Review of Financial Analysis, 95, 103438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2024.103438
4. Alareeni, BA., & Hamdan, A. (2020). ESG impact on performance of US S&P 500-listed firms. Corporate Governance, 20(7), 1409–1428. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-06-2020-0258
5. Albuquerque, R. A., Koskinen, Y. J. and Zhang, C., (2018). Corporate social responsibility and firm risk: theory and empirical evidence (November 16, 2018). Forthcoming in Management Science, DOI/10.1287/mnsc.2018.3043, WBS Finance Group Research Paper No. 259, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3286367
6. Amran, A., Lee, S. P., & Devi, S. S. (2014). The influence of governance structure and strategic corporate social responsibility toward sustainability reporting quality. Business Strategy and the Environment, 23(4), 217‑235. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.1767
7. Aouadi, A., & Marsat, S. (2018). Do ESG controversies matter for firm value? evidence from international data. Journal of Business Ethics, 151, 1027–1047. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3213-8
8. Arellano, M., & Bond, S. (1991). Some tests of specification for panel data: monte carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. The Review of Economic Studies, 58(2), 277‑297. https://doi.org/10.2307/2297968

9. Arellano, M., & Bover, O. (1995). Another look at the instrumental variable estimation of error-components models. Journal of Econometrics, 68(1), 29‑51. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(94)01642-D
10. Atan, R., Alam, MM., Said, J., & Zamri, M. (2018). The impacts of environmental, social, and governance factors on firm performance: panel study of malaysian companies. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 29(2), 182–194. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-03-2017-0033
11. Barnea, A., Rubin, A. (2010). Corporate social responsibility as a conflict between shareholders. Journal of Business Ethics, 97, 71–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0496-z
12. Barnett, M. L. (2007). Stakeholder influence capacity and the variability of financial returns to corporate social responsibility. The Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 794–816. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20159336
13. Barnett, M. L., & Salomon, R. M. (2012). Does it pay to be really good? addressing the shape of the relationship between social and financial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 33(11), 1304‑1320. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.1980
14. Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99‑120. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108
15. Bear, S., Rahman, N. & Post, C. (2010). The impact of board diversity and gender composition on corporate social responsibility and firm reputation. Journal of Business Ethics, 97, 207–221. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0505-2
16. Berg, F., Kölbel, J. F., & Rigobon, R. (2022). Aggregate confusion: the divergence of esg ratings. Review of Finance, 26(6), 1315‑1344. https://doi.org/10.1093/rof/rfac033
17. Chytis, E., Eriotis, N., & Mitroulia, M. (2024). ESG in business research: a bibliometric analysis. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 17(10), 460. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm17100460
18. Cosma, S., Galletta, S., Mazzù, S., & Rimo, G. (2024). Banks’ fossil fuel divestment and corporate governance: the role of board gender diversity. Energy Economics, 139, 107948. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2024.107948
19. Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: concepts, evidence, and implications. The Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65–91. https://doi.org/10.2307/258887
20. Elmanaseer, M. I., & Gerged, A. M. (2025). How do institutional pressures reshape the association between corporate sustainability disclosure and firm value in emerging economies? the moderating role of the audit committee function. Business Strategy and the Environment, 34(6), 7253‑7283. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.4340 Garcia, A. S., Mendes-Da-Silva, W., & Orsato, R. J. (2017). Sensitive industries produce better ESG performance: Evidence from emerging markets. Journal of Cleaner Production, 150, 135‑147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.02.180
21. Gonçalves, T. C., Dias, J., & Barros, V. (2022). Sustainability performance and the cost of capital. International Journal of Financial Studies, 10(3), 63. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijfs10030063
22. Hazaea, S. A., Cai, C., Khatib, S. F. A., & Hael, M. (2025). The moderating role of audit quality in the relationship between ESG practices and the cost of capital: evidence from the United Kingdom. Borsa Istanbul Review, 25(5), 1085‑1099. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bir.2025.06.007
23. Imran, M., Liu, X., Arif, M., Rahman, S. U., Manan, F., Khattak, S. R., & Wang, R. (2023). Sustainable corporate governance mediates between firm performance and corporate social responsibility using structural equation modelling. Frontiers in Energy Research, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenrg.2023.1121853
24. Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305‑360. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X
25. Lin, Z. (2024). Does ESG performance indicate corporate economic sustainability? evidence based on the sustainable growth rate. Borsa Istanbul Review, 24(3), 485‑493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bir.2024.02.010
26. Marzuki, A., Nor, F. M., Ramli, N. A., Basah, M. Y. A., & Aziz, M. R. A. (2023). The influence of esg, sri, ethical, and impact investing activities on portfolio and financial performance—bibliometric analysis/mapping and clustering analysis. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 16(7), 321. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm16070321
27. Naciti, V. (2019). Corporate governance and board of directors: the effect of a board composition on firm sustainability performance. Journal of Cleaner Production, 237, 117727. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.117727
28. Nirino, N., Santoro, G., Miglietta, N., & Quaglia, R. (2021). Corporate controversies and company’s financial performance: exploring the moderating role of ESG practices. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 162, 120341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120341
29. Patekar, A., & Mahajan, S. (2025). Unraveling the ESG-firm value nexus: a systematic analysis of current literature and emerging themes. Business Performance Review, 3(2), 49-65. https://doi.org/10.22495/bprv3i2p5
30. Rodriguez-Fernandez, M. (2016). Social responsibility and financial performance: the role of good corporate governance. BRQ Business Research Quarterly, 19(2), 137‑151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brq.2015.08.001
31. Sahu, M., Alahdal, W. M., Pandey, D. K., Baatwah, S. R., & Bajaher, M. S. (2025). Board gender diversity and firm performance: unveiling the ESG effect. Sustainable Futures, 9, 100493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sftr.2025.100493
32. Sciarelli, M., Landi, G., Turriziani, L., & Prisco, A. (2024). Does corporate sustainability mitigate firm risk? an empirical analysis on S&P 500 controversial companies. Social Responsibility Journal, 20(1), 38–58. https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-09-2021-0388
33. Shah, S. S. H., Basit, A., Ahmed, S., Khan, M. A., & Tangl, A. (2024). Board composition, ESG practices, and firm performance: evidence from the Pakistan stock exchange. The Economics and Finance Letters, 11(2), 146‑162. https://doi.org/10.18488/29.v11i2.3765
34. Shaikh, I. (2022). Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) practice and firm performance: international evidence. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 23(1), 218–237. https://doi.org/10.3846/jbem.2022.16202
35. Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. The Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610. https://doi.org/10.2307/258788
36. Xie, J., Nozawa, W., Yagi, M., Fujii, H., & Managi, S. (2019). Do environmental, social, and governance activities improve corporate financial performance? Business Strategy and the Environment, 28(2), 286‑300. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2224