IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i24p11083-d1815165.html

Do Institutional Investors’ ESG Commitments Affect ESG Rating Disagreement? An Empirical Analysis of UNPRI Signatory Commitment

Author

Listed:
  • Yinghao Sun

    (School of Economics and Management, Southeast University, Nanjing 211189, China)

  • Zhibin Chen

    (School of Economics and Management, Southeast University, Nanjing 211189, China)

Abstract

This study conducted a quasi-natural experiment on Chinese mutual funds that signed the United Nations Principles for Responsible Investment (UNPRI) to examine whether institutional investors’ ESG commitments reduce ESG rating disagreements among their portfolio firms. We find that firms held by UNPRI-signatory investors exhibit significantly less ESG rating disagreement than those held by non-UNPRI investors. We further demonstrate that this effect operates through two channels: improved ESG disclosure quality and increased external ESG attention. Corporate governance and industry ESG sensitivity positively moderates the relationship between institutional investors’ ESG commitments and ESG rating disagreement. Moreover, the mitigating effect is more pronounced for domestic rating agencies. This study not only provides evidence for the role of institutional investors in ESG development but also identifies potential pathways to reduce ESG rating discrepancies, offering insights into enhancing the reliability of ESG rating outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Yinghao Sun & Zhibin Chen, 2025. "Do Institutional Investors’ ESG Commitments Affect ESG Rating Disagreement? An Empirical Analysis of UNPRI Signatory Commitment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(24), pages 1-30, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:24:p:11083-:d:1815165
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/24/11083/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/24/11083/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:17:y:2025:i:24:p:11083-:d:1815165. 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: 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.