IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2609.28549.html

Do Female Directors Raise ESG Ratings? A Meta-Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Karolina Hozova
  • Tomas Havranek
  • Zuzana Irsova

Abstract

Appointing more women to corporate boards is widely expected to also raise firms' environmental, social, and governance (ESG) performance. We provide the first meta-analysis of this relationship, drawing on 533 estimates from 106 studies that measure ESG performance with Bloomberg or LSEG ratings. The average reported effect of a one-percentage-point increase in board gender diversity is about 0.28 ESG points, but much of it does not survive scrutiny. Correcting for publication bias with a battery of linear and non-linear methods lowers the effect to between roughly 0.08 and 0.17 points. A best-practice estimate that also imposes sound study design puts it near 0.12 for most of the world, markedly higher for the Middle East, and near -0.11 for the Southeast Asian markets that dominate the Asian evidence. The differences that remain across studies are systematic, driven mainly by geography and by the choice of estimation method rather than by the ESG-rating provider or the controls a study includes. Board gender diversity may be well worth pursuing on its own merits, but the evidence that it reliably raises ESG scores is weaker than the published record suggests.

Suggested Citation

  • Karolina Hozova & Tomas Havranek & Zuzana Irsova, 2026. "Do Female Directors Raise ESG Ratings? A Meta-Analysis," Papers 2609.28549, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2609.28549
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2609.28549
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • G34 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Mergers; Acquisitions; Restructuring; Corporate Governance
    • M14 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Corporate Culture; Diversity; Social Responsibility
    • J16 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination
    • C11 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Bayesian Analysis: General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2609.28549. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arxiv.org/ .

    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.