IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i22p9904-d1520198.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impact of Corporate Governance on Firms’ Sustainability Performance: Case Study of BIST 50 Index Companies

Author

Listed:
  • Serhii Lehenchuk

    (Department of Information Systems in Management and Accounting, Faculty of Business and Services, Zhytomyr Polytechnic State University, 10005 Zhytomyr, Ukraine)

  • Iryna Zhyhlei

    (Department of Information Systems in Management and Accounting, Faculty of Business and Services, Zhytomyr Polytechnic State University, 10005 Zhytomyr, Ukraine)

  • Olena Ivashko

    (Faculty of Administration and Social Sciences, University of Economics and Innovation in Lublin, 20-209 Lublin, Poland
    Faculty of Economics and Management, Lesia Ukrainka Volyn National University, 43025 Lutsk, Ukraine)

  • Ihor Chulipa

    (Faculty of Administration and Social Sciences, University of Economics and Innovation in Lublin, 20-209 Lublin, Poland
    Faculty of Economics and Management, Lesia Ukrainka Volyn National University, 43025 Lutsk, Ukraine)

  • Bogdan Wit

    (Department of Information Technology Process Engineering, Lublin University of Technology, 20-618 Lublin, Poland)

Abstract

Purpose: the purpose of this study is to investigate whether corporate governance mechanisms and attributes influence the sustainability performance of companies included in the BIST 50 Index. Results and contributions: Regression analysis showed that there was a significant positive influence of board tenure on sustainability performance and all its types; board size on environmental performance; and a dummy variable for board evaluation externally facilitated and company size on sustainability, environmental, and social performance. A significant negative impact of director attendance at board meetings on social performance was also revealed. This study contributes to the literature on the role of corporate governance in achieving the SDGs for BIST 50 Index companies, highlighting the significant impact of its individual indicators on the achievement of sustainability performance. Methodology: The authors reviewed 45 sustainability reports of BIST 50 Index companies for 2023. Four indices—Sustainability Performance, Environmental Performance, Social Performance, and Corporate Governance Performance Indexes—were developed to characterize sustainability performance and its types based on a content analysis of sustainability disclosures. To analyze the influence of mechanisms and characteristics of the corporate governance system on sustainability performance, eight independent variables were used: board size, number of board meetings, director attendance at board meetings, board independence, board tenure, a dummy variable for board evaluation externally facilitated, a dummy variable for internal auditors present, and a dummy variable for CEO and Chair functions combined. Two control variables, company size and leverage, were used as well. Gap: Today, the scientific literature has no universal approach and understanding of how the corporate governance system should be developed to improve sustainability performance or its individual components. Relevance: Development of a corporate governance system is one of the ways to increase the level of sustainability performance of companies. Impact: The results of the study made it possible to produce several recommendations (expand the number of board members, develop an effective procedure for regular changes of general directors in company boards, introduce independent external control tools in the corporate governance systems of companies) that will lead to the achievement of SDGs 5, 8, 16.

Suggested Citation

  • Serhii Lehenchuk & Iryna Zhyhlei & Olena Ivashko & Ihor Chulipa & Bogdan Wit, 2024. "Impact of Corporate Governance on Firms’ Sustainability Performance: Case Study of BIST 50 Index Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(22), pages 1-15, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:22:p:9904-:d:1520198
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/22/9904/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/22/9904/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mauro Romano & Alessandro Cirillo & Christian Favino & Antonio Netti, 2020. "ESG (Environmental, Social and Governance) Performance and Board Gender Diversity: The Moderating Role of CEO Duality," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-16, November.
    2. Burcu Gurol & Valentina Lagasio, 2022. "Women board members’ impact on ESG disclosure with environment and social dimensions: evidence from the European banking sector," Social Responsibility Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 19(1), pages 211-228, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fabio Caputo & Rossella Leopizzi, 2021. "Achieving Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) among Walking and Talking," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-4, February.
    2. Mauro Romano & Antonio Netti & Antonio Corvino & Marika Intenza, 2024. "Environmental innovation in healthcare industry: The moderating role of women on board in cost of debt," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(3), pages 1921-1933, May.
    3. Shivani Shivhare & V. Shunmugasundaram, 2024. "How Government, Social and Personnel Support Leverage the Sustainability in Start-ups: The Moderating Role of Board Gender Diversity," Indian Journal of Corporate Governance, , vol. 17(2), pages 300-327, December.
    4. Nejla Ould Daoud Ellili, 2023. "Impact of corporate governance on environmental, social, and governance disclosure: Any difference between financial and non‐financial companies?," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(2), pages 858-873, March.
    5. Arnone, Massimo & Leogrande, Angelo, 2024. "The Sustainability Of The Factoring Chain In Europe In The Light Of The Integration Of Esg Factors," OSF Preprints 753gf, Center for Open Science.
    6. Wided Khiari & Houssein Ballouk & Wiem Chiba, 2025. "CSR Committee, Women on the Board, and Green Bond Issuance: Evidence from France," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-18, March.
    7. Tingting Hu & Kun You & Char-Lee Lok, 2025. "State ownership, political connection and ESG performance," Risk Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 27(1), pages 1-33, February.
    8. Khan, Muhammad Arif, 2022. "ESG disclosure and Firm performance: A bibliometric and meta analysis," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    9. Yusuf Babatunde Adeneye & Setareh Fasihi & Ines Kammoun & Khaldoon Albitar, 2024. "Does earnings management constrain ESG performance? The role of corporate governance," International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 21(1), pages 69-92, March.
    10. Caiming Nie & Dor Kushinsky & Ting Ren, 2025. "Digital Transformation, CEO Compensation, and ESG Performance: Evidence from Chinese Listed Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-23, April.
    11. Asaad Mubarak Hussien Musa & Rayan Alqubaysi & Hassan Ali Alqahtani, 2025. "The Effect of Board Characteristics on ESG Commitment in Saudi Arabia: How Diversity, Independence, Size, and Expertise Shape Corporate Sustainability Practices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-22, June.
    12. Shi, Dinghao & Li, Zhiqiang & Huang, Yan & Tan, Haoyu & Ling, Yixin & Liu, Yunuo & Tu, Yongqian, 2024. "Market competition and ESG performance-based on the mediating role of board independence," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 96(PA).
    13. Nguyen Vinh Khuong & Vu Tran Trong Tai & Nguyen Thi Phuong Thao & Pham Minh Tuan & Tran Tuan Dung & Vo Tuong Khanh, 2024. "Corporate governance and corporate carbon disclosures: The moderating role of earnings management," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(5), pages 4596-4611, September.
    14. Barbosa, Anrafel de Souza & Crispim, Maria Cristina & da Silva, Luiz Bueno & da Silva, Jonhatan Magno Norte & Barbosa, Aglaucibelly Maciel & Correia, Lucas Miguel Alencar de Morais & Morioka, Sandra N, 2025. "Empirical analysis of workers' perceptions of ESG impacts on corporate sustainability performance: A methodological innovation combining the PLS-SEM, PROMETHEE-ROC and FIMIX-PLS methods," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 215(C).
    15. Giuseppe Nicolò & Gianluca Zanellato & Benedetta Esposito & Adriana Tiron‐Tudor, 2024. "Cultural dimensions and sustainability disclosure in the banking sector: Insights from a qualitative comparative analysis approach," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(8), pages 8086-8101, December.
    16. Luning Tong & Maowei Chen, 2024. "The Impact of Female Director Background on the ESG Performance of Chinese Technology Firms: A Moderating Effect Based on Risk Appetite," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-20, December.
    17. Haoming Ding & Zerui Wang & Hanyu Xu & Zi Lin, 2024. "A Study on the Impact of Board Characteristics on the Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Responsibilities of Listed Companies—Evidence from Chinese Listings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-16, November.
    18. Mingyao Cao & Keyi Duan & Haslindar Ibrahim, 2025. "Corporate underinvestment and its effects on environmental, social, and governance performance," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 27(6), pages 13755-13775, June.
    19. Hail Jung & Seyeong Song & Chang-Keun Song, 2021. "Carbon Emission Regulation, Green Boards, and Corporate Environmental Responsibility," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-12, April.
    20. Jingzhuo Yu & Yong-Sik Hwang, 2024. "The Interaction Effects of Board Independence and Digital Transformation on Environmental, Social, and Governance Performance: Complementary or Substitutive?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(20), pages 1-26, October.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:22:p:9904-:d:1520198. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.