A Study on the Governance Scores of Firms: Evidence from Borsa Istanbul

Öz

ESG stands for Environmental, Social, and Governance, which are three central factors used to measure the sustainability and ethical impact of an investment in a company. ESG criteria are used by investors and financial analysts to evaluate the sustainability and ethical impact of investments, and they are increasingly becoming a standard consideration in investment decision-making processes. In this study, analyses were conducted within the framework of the governance dimension. In other words, the effect of governance ESG scores on firm performance will be determined in the study. Return on Assets (ROA) is used as an indicator of firm performance in the study. In the study, the data for the years 2013-2021 of 12 firms operating in Borsa Istanbul (BIST) whose ESG sustainability scores have been announced continuously are used. The panel-corrected standard errors (PCSE) panel robust estimator is used since the developed models have problems of variance, autocorrelation, and cross-sectional dependence and are resistant to these problems. As a result of the analyses, it is found that the governance ESG score has a positive and significant effect on firm performance. In other words, an increase in the governance ESG score is a factor that increases firm performance. The findings of the study are expected to help regulators and policymakers to formulate policies on ESG disclosure.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Governance
• ESG
• Firm Performance
• Governance Scores

Firmaların Yönetişim Skorları Üzerine Bir Araştırma: Borsa İstanbul'dan Kanıtlar

Öz

ÇSY, bir şirkete yapılan yatırımın sürdürülebilirliğini ve etik etkisini ölçmek için kullanılan üç merkezi faktör olan Çevresel, Sosyal ve Yönetişim anlamına gelmektedir. ÇSY kriterleri, yatırımcılar ve finansal analistler tarafından yatırımların sürdürülebilirliğini ve etik etkisini değerlendirmek için kullanılmakta ve yatırım karar alma süreçlerinde giderek standart bir husus haline gelmektedir. Bu çalışmada yönetişim boyutu çerçevesinde analizler yapılmıştır. Başka bir deyişle, çalışmada yönetişim ÇSY puanlarının firma performansı üzerindeki etkisi belirlenecektir. Çalışmada firma performansının bir göstergesi olarak Varlık Kârlılığı (ROA) kullanılmıştır. Çalışmada Borsa İstanbul'da (BIST) faaliyet gösteren ve ÇSY sürdürülebilirlik skorları sürekli açıklanan 12 firmanın 2013-2021 yıllarına ait verileri kullanılmıştır. Geliştirilen modellerin varyans, otokorelasyon ve yatay kesit bağımlılığı sorunlarına sahip olması ve bu sorunlara karşı dayanıklı olması nedeniyle panel düzeltmeli standart hatalar (PCSE) panel sağlam tahmincisi kullanılmaktadır. Analizler sonucunda yönetişim ÇSY puanının firma performansı üzerinde pozitif ve anlamlı bir etkiye sahip olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Başka bir deyişle yönetişimin ÇSY puanının artması firma performansını artıran bir faktördür. Çalışmanın bulgularının, düzenleyicilere ve politika yapıcılara ÇSY 'nin açıklanmasına ilişkin politikalar oluşturmada yardımcı olması beklenmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Yönetişim Skorları
• Yönetişim
• ESG
• Firma Performansı

Kaynakça

1. Alareeni, B. A., & Hamdan, A. (2020). ESG impact on performance of US S&P 500-listed firms. Corporate Governance, 20(7), 1409-1428. doi.org/10.1108/CG-06-2020-0258.
2. Albitar, K., Hussainey, K., Kolade, N., & Gerged, A. M. (2020). ESG disclosure and firm performance before and after IR: The moderating role of governance mechanisms. International Journal of Accounting & Information Management, 28(3), 429-444. doi: 10.1108/IJAIM-09-2019-0108.
3. Albuquerque, R., Koskinen, Y., & Zhang, C. (2019). Corporate social responsibility and firm risk: Theory and empirical evidence. Management Science, 65(10), 4451-4469. doi:10.1287/mnsc.2018.3043.
4. Alsayegh, M. F., Abdul Rahman, R., & Homayoun, S. (2020). Corporate economic, environmental, and social sustainability performance transformation through ESG disclosure. Sustainability, 12(9), 3910.
5. Atan, R., Alam, M. M., 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. doi:10.1108/MEQ-03-2017-0033.
6. Aureli, S., Gigli, S., Medei, R., & Supino, E. (2020). The value relevance of environmental, social, and governance disclosure: Evidence from Dow Jones Sustainability World Index listed companies. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27(1), 43-52.
7. Bahadori, N., Kaymak, T., & Seraj, M. (2021). Environmental, social, and governance factors in emerging markets: The impact on firm performance. Business Strategy & Development, 4(4), 411-422. doi:10.1002/bsd2.167.
8. Bénabou, R., & Tirole, J. (2010). Individual and corporate social responsibility. Economica, 77(305), 1-19. doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0335.2009.00843.x.

9. Beretta, V., Demartini, C., & Trucco, S. (2019). Does environmental, social and governance performance influence intellectual capital disclosure tone in integrated reporting?. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 20(1), 100-124.
10. Bernardi, C., & Stark, A. (2018). Environmental, social and governance disclosure, integrated reporting, and the accuracy of analyst forecasts. The British Accounting Review, 50(1), 16-31. doi: 10.1016/j.bar.2016.10.001.
11. Bhaskaran, R. K., Ting, I. W. K., Sukumaran, S. K., & Sumod, S. D. (2020). Environmental, social and governance initiatives and wealth creation for firms: An empirical examination. Managerial and Decision Economics, 41(5), 710-729.
12. Broadstock, D. C., Chan, K., Cheng, L. T., & Wang, X. (2021). The role of ESG performance during times of financial crisis: Evidence from COVID-19 in China. Finance research letters, 38, 101716.
13. Bruna, M. G., Loprevite, S., Raucci, D., Ricca, B., & Rupo, D. (2022). Investigating the marginal impact of ESG results on corporate financial performance. Finance Research Letters, 47, 102828. doi: 10.1016/j.frl.2022.102828.
14. Buallay, A., Al-Ajmi, J., & Barone, E. (2022). Sustainability engagement’s impact on tourism sector performance: linear and nonlinear models. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 35(2), 361-384.
15. Buallay, A., Kukreja, G., Aldhaen, E., Al Mubarak, M., & Hamdan, A. M. (2020). Corporate social responsibility disclosure and firms' performance in Mediterranean countries: a stakeholders' perspective. EuroMed Journal of Business, 15(3), 361-375. doi:10.1108/EMJB-05-2019-0066.
16. Carnini Pulino, S., Ciaburri, M., Magnanelli, B. S., & Nasta, L. (2022). Does ESG disclosure influence firm performance?. Sustainability, 14(13), 7595.
17. Cek, K., & Eyupoglu, S. (2020). Does environmental, social and governance performance influence economic performance?. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 21(4), 1165-1184.
18. Clarkson, P.M., Li, Y., Richardson, G.D. and Vasvari, F.P. (2008). Revisiting the relation between environmental performance and environmental disclosure - an empirical analysis. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 33(4/5), 303-327.
19. Çetenak, E. H., Ersoy, E., & Özcan, I. Ş. I. K. (2022). ESG (Çevresel, Sosyal ve Kurumsal Yönetim) Skorunun Firma Performansına Etkisi: Türk Bankacılık Sektörü Örneği. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, (63), 75-82.
20. De Souza Barbosa, A., da Silva, M. C. B. C., da Silva, L. B., Morioka, S. N., & de Souza, V. F. (2023). Integration of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criteria: their impacts on corporate sustainability performance. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10(1), 1-18.
21. Diaye, M. A., Ho, S. H., & Oueghlissi, R. (2022). ESG performance and economic growth: a panel co-integration analysis. Empirica, 49(1), 99-122.
22. Doğan M., & Topal, Y. (2015). Sahiplik yapısının firma performansı üzerine etkisi: Türkiye örneği. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 20(4), 165-177.
23. Doğan, M. (2021). Relationship between sustainability report, financial performance, and ownership structure: Research on the Turkish banking sector. Istanbul Business Research, 50(1), 77-102.
24. Doğan, M., & Mecek, G. (2015). Pazarlama Harcamalarının Firma Değeri Üzerindeki Etkisi Üzerine Bir Araştırma. İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi, 7(2), 180-194.
25. Duque-Grisales, E., & Aguilera-Caracuel, J. (2021). Environmental, social and governance (ESG) scores and financial performance of multilatinas: Moderating effects of geographic international diversification and financial slack. Journal of Business Ethics, 168(2), 315-334. doi: 10.1007/s10551-019-04177-w
26. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pittman Publishing.
27. 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.
28. Gillan, S. L., Koch, A., & Starks, L. T. (2021). Firms and social responsibility: A review of ESG and CSR research in corporate finance. Journal of Corporate Finance, 66, 101889. doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2021.101889.
29. Güneysu, Y. (2023). Çevresel, Sosyal ve Kurumsal Yönetim Faaliyetlerinin Nakit Bulundurma Politikasındaki Rolü: BIST Sürdürülebilirlik Endeksi Örneği. Muhasebe Enstitüsü Dergisi, (69), 45-56.
30. Huang, D. Z. (2021). Environmental, social and governance (ESG) activity and firm performance: A review and consolidation. Accounting & finance, 61(1), 335-360.
31. Jensen, M. C. (2002). Value maximization, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function. Business ethics quarterly, 12(2), 235-256. doi.org/10.2307/3857812.
32. Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305-360.
33. Jóźwik, B., Doğan, M., & Gürsoy, S. (2023). The Impact of Renewable Energy Consumption on Environmental Quality in Central European Countries: The Mediating Role of Digitalization and Financial Development. Energies, 16(20), 7041.
34. Jóźwik, B., Gürsoy, S., & Doğan, M. (2023). Nuclear Energy and Financial Development for a Clean Environment: Examining the N-Shaped Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis in Top Nuclear Energy-Consuming Countries. Energies, 16(22), 7494.
35. Khan, M. A. (2022). ESG disclosure and Firm performance: A bibliometric and Meta Analysis. Research in International Business and Finance, 61, 101668. doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2022.101668.
36. La Torre, M., Mango, F., Cafaro, A., & Leo, S. (2020). Does the esg index affect stock return? evidence from the eurostoxx50. Sustainability, 12(16), 6387.
37. Landi, G., & Sciarelli, M. (2019). Towards a more ethical market: the impact of ESG rating on corporate financial performance. Social Responsibility Journal, 15(1), 11-27. doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-11-2017-0254.
38. Maiti, M. (2021). Is ESG the succeeding risk factor?. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 11(3), 199-213.
39. Mohammad, W. M. W., & Wasiuzzaman, S. (2021). Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) disclosure, competitive advantage and performance of firms in Malaysia. Cleaner Environmental Systems, 2, 100015, doi:10.1016/j.gfj.2017.03.001.
40. Naseem, T., Shahzad, F., Asim, G. A., Rehman, I. U., & Nawaz, F. (2020). Corporate social responsibility engagement and firm performance in Asia Pacific: The role of enterprise risk management. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27(2), 501-513.
41. Paolone, F., Cucari, N., Wu, J., & Tiscini, R. (2022). How do ESG pillars impact firms’ marketing performance? A configurational analysis in the pharmaceutical sector. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 37(8), 1594-1606.
42. Pirtea, M. G., Noja, G. G., Cristea, M., & Panait, M. (2021). Interplay between environmental, social and governance coordinates and the financial performance of agricultural companies. Agricultural Economics, 67(12), 479-490.
43. Refinitiv. (2021). https://www.refinitiv.com/en?utm_content=Refinitiv%20Brand%20Core-CEE-EMEA-G-EN BMM&utm_medium=cpc&utm_source=google&utm_campaign=596234_PaidSearchBrandKeywords&elqCampaignId=16988&utm_term=%20+refinitiv&gclid=CjwKCAjw3K2XBhAzEiwAmmgrAu0fxJ2yHaPSbJrv1e7t5m4UPGDSRWaJKMPuArp_j48mwDc36CVQRRoCEbQQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds Accessed date: 20.08.2023
44. Roberts, R. (1992). Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosure: an application of stakeholder theory. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17,595-612.
45. Ross, S. A. (1973). The economic theory of agency: The principal's problem. The American economic review, 63(2), 134-139.
46. Ruan, L., & Liu, H. (2021). Environmental, Social, Governance Activities and Firm Performance: Evidence from China, Sustainability, 13, 767. htpps://doi.org/10.3390/su13020767
47. Saadaoui, H., Dogan, M., & Omri, E. (2023). The impacts of hydroelectricity generation, financial development, geopolitical risk, income, and foreign direct investment on carbon emissions in Turkey. Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, 1-23.
48. Shahbaz, M., Dogan, M., Akkus, H. T., & Gursoy, S. (2023). The effect of financial development and economic growth on ecological footprint: evidence from top 10 emitter countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 1-16.
49. Shahbaz, M., Karaman, A. S., Kilic, M., & Uyar, A. (2020). Board attributes, CSR engagement, and corporate performance: what is the nexus in the energy sector?. Energy Policy, 143, 111582.
50. Shaikh, I. (2022). Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) practice and firm performance: an international evidence. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 23(1), 218-237.
51. Simsek, O., & Cankaya, S. (2021). Examining the relationship between ESG scores and financial performance in banks: Evidence from G8 countries. Press Acad. Procedia, 14, 169-170.
52. Sultana, S., Zulkifli, N., & Zainal, D. (2018). Environmental, social and governance (ESG) and investment decision in Bangladesh. Sustainability, 10(6), 1831.
53. Şeker, Y., & Güngör, N. (2022). Does ESG performance impact financial performance? Evidence from the utilities sector. Muhasebe Bilim Dünyası Dergisi, 24(MODAVICA Özel Sayısı), 160-183.
54. Şeker, Y., & Şengül, E. (2022). Çevresel, Sosyal Ve Kurumsal Yönetim (Esg) Performansı: Uluslararası Bir Araştırma. Journal of Accounting and Taxation Studies, 15(2), 349-387.
55. Şişman, M. E., & Çankaya, S. (2021). Çevresel, Sosyal ve Kurumsal Yönetişim (ESG) Verilerinin Firmaların Finansal Performansına Etkisi: Hava Yolu Sektörü Üzerine Bir Çalışma. Çukurova Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 25(1), 73-91.
56. Ting, I. W. K., Azizan, N. A., Bhaskaran, R. K., & Sukumaran, S. K. (2019). Corporate social performance and firm performance: Comparative study among developed and emerging market firms. Sustainability, 12(1), 26.
57. Ullah, A., Dogan, M., Topcu, B. A., & Saadaoui, H. (2023). Modeling the impacts of technological innovation and financial development on environmental sustainability: New evidence from the world's top 14 financially developed countries. Energy Strategy Reviews, 50, 101229.
58. Velte, P. (2017). Does ESG performance have an impact on financial performance? Evidence from Germany. Journal of Global Responsibility, 80(2), 169-178. doi.org/10.1108/JGR-11-2016-0029.
59. Wasiuzzaman, S., Ibrahim, S. A., & Kawi, F. (2022). Environmental, social and governance (ESG) disclosure and firm performance: does national culture matter?. Meditari Accountancy Research, (ahead-of-print). https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-06-2021-1356
60. Yoon, B., Lee, J. H., & Byun, R. (2018). Does ESG performance enhance firm value? Evidence from Korea. Sustainability, 10(10), 3635, doi.org/10.3390/su10103635