IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rsk/journ3/7963811.html

The impact of environmental, social and governance scores on corporate risk: evidence from Chinese listed companies

Author

Listed:
  • Jing Huang
  • Zhuoran Zhang
  • Shih-tse Lo
  • Yihong Huang

Abstract

The existing literature provides limited evidence on how environmental, social and governance (ESG) performance relates to corporate risk (in particular, total risk and systemic risk) in China. Using a comprehensive panel of companies listed on China’s A-share market (45 850 firm-year observations, and volatility-based risk measures constructed from 1 025 106 firm-day return records), this study examines whether changes in ESG performance are associated with firms’ market-based risk exposure. The results show that ESG score upgrades are significantly associated with higher total risk (ð ›½ 0:1868, ð ‘ < 0:001) and higher systemic risk, whereas ESG downgrades are associated with reduced risk exposure. The ESG–risk association is more pronounced in environmentally sensitive industries. In dimension-level analyses, environmental and social improvements are positively associated with risk, while governance exhibits a modest negative association. Mediation analyses further indicate that stock price volatility partially transmits the relationship between ESG changes and risk outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Jing Huang & Zhuoran Zhang & Shih-tse Lo & Yihong Huang, . "The impact of environmental, social and governance scores on corporate risk: evidence from Chinese listed companies," Journal of Operational Risk, Journal of Operational Risk.
    • Handle: RePEc:rsk:journ3:7963811
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.risk.net/journal-of-operational-risk/7963811/the-impact-of-environmental-social-and-governance-scores-on-corporate-risk-evidence-from-chinese-listed-companies
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    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:rsk:journ3:7963811. 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: Thomas Paine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.risk.net/journal-of-operational-risk .

    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.