IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/finlet/v83y2025ics1544612325009584.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

ESG rating disagreement and supply chain bargaining power: evidence from China

Author

Listed:
  • Si, Yuxiu
  • Wu, Gongliang

Abstract

This study uses data from Chinese A-share listed firms between 2015 and 2022 to examine the impact of ESG rating disagreement on firms' supply chain bargaining power. The findings indicate that ESG rating disagreement has a significant negative impact on supply chain bargaining power, while high-quality information disclosure can significantly mitigate this adverse effect. The mechanism analysis reveals that ESG rating disagreement hinders the expansion of firms' supply chain bargaining power by affecting investor sentiment and increasing reputational risks. Heterogeneity analysis further shows that the suppressive effect of ESG rating disagreement on supply chain bargaining power is more pronounced in state-owned enterprises, firms in regions with low levels of marketization, and non-heavy-polluting firms. This study provides important insights for improving ESG ratings and promoting the development of a unified and comprehensive ESG rating system.

Suggested Citation

  • Si, Yuxiu & Wu, Gongliang, 2025. "ESG rating disagreement and supply chain bargaining power: evidence from China," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:finlet:v:83:y:2025:i:c:s1544612325009584
    DOI: 10.1016/j.frl.2025.107699
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1544612325009584
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.frl.2025.107699?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:finlet:v:83:y:2025:i:c:s1544612325009584. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/frl .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.