Integrating ESG factors in investment decisions by mutual fund managers: a case of selected Johannesburg Stock Exchange-listed companies
-
Received October 22, 2020;Accepted November 24, 2020;Published December 7, 2020
-
Author(s)Link to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8763-0616
-
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.21511/imfi.17(4).2020.23
-
Article InfoVolume 17 2020, Issue #4, pp. 258-270
- TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯ
-
Cited by4 articlesJournal title: Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative ScienceArticle title: Taking ESG strategies for achieving profits: a dynamic panel data analysisDOI: 10.1108/JEFAS-02-2023-0030Volume: / Issue: / First page: / Year: 2024Contributors: Alejandro J. Useche, Jennifer Martínez-Ferrero, Giovanni E. ReyesJournal title: Vision: The Journal of Business PerspectiveArticle title: Corporate Sustainability Practices: A Systematic Literature Review and Bibliometric AnalysisDOI: 10.1177/09722629231203125Volume: / Issue: / First page: / Year: 2023Contributors: K. P. Sabirali, S. MahalakshmiJournal title: Mathematical Problems in EngineeringArticle title: Deep Learning Model for Stock Excess Return Prediction Based on Nonlinear Random Matrix and Esg FactorDOI: 10.1155/2022/5239493Volume: 2022 / Issue: / First page: 1 / Year: 2022Contributors: Tiantian Meng, M. H. Yahya, Jingmin Chai, Zaoli YangJournal title: Revista Venezolana de GerenciaArticle title: Reportes y dimensiones de la sostenibilidad corporativa. Un análisis bibliométricoDOI: 10.52080/rvgluz.29.108.16Volume: 29 / Issue: 108 / First page: / Year: 2024Contributors: Rodrigo Alfonso Saavedra Najar, Luz Dary González, Jheisson Andres Abril Teatin
- 967 Views
-
409 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
This paper examines whether mutual fund managers incorporate environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors when deciding which sector to invest on behalf of their trustees. In doing this, the top 20 South African mutual fund companies (asset managers) listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) were selected. The paper identified the top 30 JSE listed companies (in the large industrial, equipment, and machinery sectors, excluding unlisted and service-oriented companies) where trustees’ funds were invested (with a total of 28 companies between 2007 and 2017) from the mutual fund companies’ Equity Fund Fact Sheets 2017 (representing recent investment focus). ESG data were collected from the integrated and sustainability reports at the sampled companies’ websites, and financial data were sourced from the IRESS database. This study adopted the panel data analysis. The results show an insignificant negative relationship between the ESG proxies (water usage, employee health and safety cost [number of work-related fatalities], percentage of women on corporate board) and return on equity (ROE). This means that the sampled companies disregard the United Nations Principle of Responsible Investment (UN PRI) guideline, suggesting that asset managers focus on increasing returns on shareholders’ investment without considering ESG issues. The paper concludes that the disregard for responsible investment guidelines does not encourage companies to improve their unsustainable business practices.
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)Q51, Q56
-
References63
-
Tables6
-
Figures0
-
- Table 1. Descriptive statistics of study variables
- Table 2. Regression analysis results
- Table 3. Shapiro-Wilk W test for normality
- Table 4. Multicollinearity test
- Table 5. Random-effects model
- Table 6. Hausman test results
-
- Abad, J., Lafuente, E., & Vilajosana, J. (2013). An Assessment of the OHSAS 18001 Certification Process: Objective Drivers and Consequences on Safety Performance and Labour Productivity. Safety Science, 60, 47-56.
- Abbasi, A., & Malik, Q. (2015). Firms’ Size Moderating Financial Performance in Growing Firms: An Empirical Evidence from Pakistan. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 5(2), 334-339.
- Ahern, K., & Dittmar, A. (2012). The Changing of Boards: The Impact on Firm Valuation of Mandated Female Board Representation. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 127, 137-197.
- Albertini, E. (2013). Does Environmental Management Improve Financial Performance? A Meta-Analytical Review. Organisation and Environment, 26(4), 431-457.
- Ali, Y. (2017). Carbon, Water and Land Use Accounting: Consumption vs Production Perspectives. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 67, 921-934.
- Alshehhi, A., Nobanee, H., & Khare, N. (2018). The Impact of Sustainability Practices on Corporate Financial Performance: Literature Trends and Future Research Potential. Sustainability, 10(2), 494.
- Arun, T., Almahrog, Y., & Aribi, Z. (2015). Female Directors and Earnings Management: Evidence from UK Companies. International Review of Financial Analysis, 39, 137-146.
- Auer, B., & Schuhmacher, F. (2016). Do Socially (Ir)responsible Investment Pay? New Evidence from International ESG Data. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 59, 51-62.
- Auer, B. R. (2016). Do Socially Responsible Investment Policies Add or Destroy European Stock Portfolio Value. Journal of Business Ethics, 135(2), 381-397.
- Baik, B., Chae, J., Choi, S., & Farber, D. B. (2013). Changes in Operational Efficiency and Firm Performance: A Frontier Analysis Approach. Contemporary Accounting Research, 30(3), 996-1026.
- Barnett, M., & Salomon, R. (2012). Does It Pay to Be Really Good? Addressing the Shape of the Relationship Between Social and Financial Performance. Strategic Management Journal, 33(11), 1304-1320.
- Bauer, R., & Smeets, P. (2015). Social Identification and Investment Decision. Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organization, 117, 121-134.
- Bojan, R. (2007). The Four Capital Model, Matrix and Accounts. Casopis za kritiko znanosti, Ljubljana, 34, 227 (Spring).
- Chapple, L., & Humphrey, J. (2014). Does Board Gender Diversity Have a Financial Impact? Evidence Using Stock Portfolio Performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 122, 709-723.
- Darmadi, S. 2013. Do Women in Top Management Affect Firm Performance? Evidence from Indonesia. The International Journal of Business in Society, 13(3), 288-304.
- Edwards, D. (2015). The Link Between Company Environmental and Financial Performance (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.
- Ekins, P., Dresner, S., & Dahlström, K. (2008). The Four‐Capital Method of Sustainable Development Evaluation. European Environment, 18(2), 63-80.
- Elkington, J. 1994. Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of the 21st Century. Capstone, Oxford: New Society Publishers.
- Escrig-Omedo, E., Rivera-Lirio, J., & Miñoz-Tores, M. (2017). Integrating Multiple ESG Investors Preferences into Sustainable Investment: A Fuzzy Multicriteria Methodological Approach. Journal of Cleaner Production, 162, 1334-1345.
- Esteban-Sanchez, P., de la Cuesta-Gonzalez, M., & Paredes-Gazquez, J. (2017). Corporate Social Performance and Its Relation with Corporate Financial Performance: The International Evidence in the Banking Industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 162, 1102-1110.
- Fabius, R., Thayer., R. D., Konicki., D. L., Yarborough., C. M., Peterson., K. W., Isaac, F., Loeppke., R.R., Eisenberg, B. S., & Dreger, M. (2013). The Link Between Workforce Health and Safety and the Health of the Bottom Line: Tracking Market Performance of Companies that Nurture a “Culture of Health”. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 55(9), 993-1000.
- Fan, D., & Lo, C. K. Y. (2012). A Tough Pill to Swallow? The Impact of Voluntary Occupational Health and Safety Management System on the Firm Financial Performance in fashion and textiles industries. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 16(2), 128-140.
- Freeman, R. (1984). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. United States of America: Boston: Pitman.
- Friedman, M. (1970). The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase Its Profit. The New York Times Magazine.
- Handajani, L., Subroto., B., Sutrisco, T., & Saraswati, E. (2014). Does Board Diversity Matter on Corporate Social Disclosure? An Indonesian Evidence. Journal of Economic and Sustainable Development, 5(9), 8-16.
- Harrison, J., Freeman, R., & Abreu, M. (2015). Stakeholder Theory as an Ethical Approach to Effective Management: Applying the Theory to Multiple Contexts. Review of Business Management, 17(55), 858-869.
- Harrison, J. S., & Wicks, A. C. (2013). Stakeholder Theory, Value, and Firm Performance. Business Ethics Quarterly, 23(1), 97-124.
- Haslam, C., O’Hara, J., Kazi., A., Twumasi, R., & Haslam, R. (2016). Proactive Occupational Health and Safety Management: Promoting Good Health and Good Business. Safety Science, 81, 99-108.
- Huang, J., & Kisgen, D. (2013). Gender and Corporate Finance: Are Male Executives Overconfident Relative to Female Executive? Journal of Financial Economics, 108, 822-839.
- Husted, B., & Milton de Sousa-Filho, J. (2017). The Impact of Sustainability Governance, Country Stakeholder Orientation, and Country Risk on Environmental, Social and Governance Performance. Journal of Cleaner Production, 155, 93-102.
- Jin, A. (2014). Energy Consumption, Greenhouse Gases Emissions, Water Usage and Waste Practices: Evidence from Top Global 100 Firms in the Area of Sustainability. Journal of Strategic Innovation and Sustainability, 10(1), 49-64.
- Jo, H., Song, M., & Tsang, A. (2016). Corporate Social Responsibility and Stakeholder Governance Around the World. Global Finance Journal, 29, 42-69.
- John, A., & Adebayo, O. (2013). Effect of Firm Size on Profitability: Evidence from the Nigerian Manufacturing Sector. Prime Journal of Business Administration and Management (BAM), 3(9), 1171-1175.
- Kharatyan, D., Lopes, J., & Nunes, A. (2017). Determinants of Return on Equity: Evidence from NASDAQ 100. XXVII Jornadas Hispano-Lusas Gestión Científica.
- Kijewska, A. (2016). Determinants of the Return on Equity Ratio (ROE) on the Example of Companies from Metallurgy and Mining Sector in Poland. Metalurgija, 55(2), 285-288.
- Korditabar, S. (2015). A Model for Sustainable Value Creation in Supply Chain. Science Journal, 36(3), 395-401.
- Levi, M., Li, K., & Zhang, F. (2014). Directors Gender and Mergers and Acquisitions. Journal of Corporate Finance, 28, 185-200.
- Lin, R. J., Tan, K. H., & Geng, Y. (2013). Market demand, green product innovation, and firm performance: evidence from Vietnam motorcycle industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 40, 101-107.
- Liu, Y., Wei, Z., & Xie, F. (2014). Do Women Directors Improve Firm Performance in China? Journal of Corporate Finance, 28, 169-184.
- Loeppke, R. R., Hohn, T., Baase., C., Bunn, W.B., Burton. W. N., Eisenberg, B. S., Ennis., T., Fabius, R., Hawkins, R. J., Hudson, T. W., & Hymel, P. A. R. (2015). Integrating Health and Safety in the Workplace: How Closely Aligning Health and Safety Strategies Can Yield Measurable Benefits. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 57(5), 585-597.
- Low, D., Roberts, H., & Whiting, R. (2015). Board Gender Diversity and Firm Performance: Empirical Evidence from Hong Kong, South Korea, Malaysia and Singapore. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 35(Part A), 381-401.
- Lückerath-Rovers, M. (2013). Women on Boards and Financial Performance. Journal of Management and Governance, 17, 491-509.
- Mans-Kemp, N., & Viviers, S. (2015). Investigating Board Diversity in South Africa. Journal of Economic and Financial Sciences, 8(2), 392-414.
- Manzhynski, S., Figge, F., & Hassel, L. (2015). Sustainable Value Creation of Nine Countries of the Baltic Region. Value, Changes and Drivers. Journal of Cleaner Production, 108, 637-646.
- Nekhili, A., Nagati, H., Chtioui, T., & Nekhili, A. (2017). Gender-Diverse Board and the Relevance of Voluntary CSR Reporting. International Review of Financial Analysis, 50, 81-100.
- Nekhili, M., & Gatfaoui, H. (2013). Are Demographics Attributes and Firm Characteristics Drivers of Gender Diversity? Investigating Women’s Position of French Boards of Directors. Journal of Business Ethics, 118, 227-249.
- Niresh, A., & Thirunavukkarasu, V. (2014). Firm Size and Profitability: A Study of Listed Manufacturing Firms in Sri Lanka. International Journal of Business and Management, 9(4), 57-64.
- OʼConnor, M. (2007). The “Four Spheres” Frameworks for Sustainability. Ecological Complexity, 3, 285-292.
- Pagalung, A. (2016). Environmental Management Accounting: Identifying Future Prospects. Asia-Pacific Management Accounting Journal, 11(1), 80-94.
- Pervan, M., & Višić, J. (2012). Influence of Firm Size on its Business Success. Croatian Operational Research Review, 3(1), 213-223.
- Pilaj, H. (2017). The choice architecture of sustainable and responsible investment: Nudging investors toward ethical decision-making. Journal of Business Ethics, 140(4), 743-753.
- Probst, T., Jiang, L., & Graso, M. (2016). Leader-Member Exchange: Moderating the Health and Safety of Insecurity. Journal of Safety Research, 56, 47-56.
- Rao, K., & Tilt, C. (2016). Board Composition and Corporate Social Responsibility: The Role of Diversity, Gender, Strategy and Decision Making. Journal of Business Ethics, 138(2), 327-347.
- Santos, G., Barros., S., Mendes, F., & Lopes, N. (2013). The Main Benefits Associated with Health and Safety Management Systems Certification in Portuguese Small and Medium Enterprises Post Quality Management System Certification. Safety Science, 51(1), 29-36.
- Şener, I., & Karaye, A. (2014). Board Composition and Gender Diversity: Comparison of Turkish and Nigerian Listed Companies. Procedia-Social and Behavioural Sciences, 150, 1002-1011.
- Severo, E. A., de Guimarães, J. C. F., Dorion, E. C. H., & Nodari, C. H. (2015). Cleaner production, environmental sustainability and organizational performance: an empirical study in the Brazilian Metal-Mechanic industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 96, 118-125.
- Shim, E. (2014). Sustainability, Stakeholders Perspective and Corporate Success: A Paradigm Shift. International Journal of Business, Humanities and Technology, 4(5), 64-67.
- Shkura, I. (2017). Socially Responsible Investment in Ukraine. Journal of Economics and Management, 27(1), 75-95.
- Singal, M. (2014). The Link between Firm Financial Performance and Investment in Sustainability Initiatives. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 55(1), 19-30.
- Sobhani, A., Wahab, M., & Neumann, W. (2015). Investigating Work-Related Ill Health Effects in Optimizing the Performance of Manufacturing Systems. European Journal of Operational Research, 241, 708-718.
- Song, H., Zhao, C. & Zeng, J. (2017). Can Environmental Management Improve Financial Performance: An Empirical Study of A-Shares Listed Companies in China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 141, 1051-1056.
- Stankevičienė, J., & Čepulytė, J. (2014). Sustainable Value Creation: Coherence of Corporate Social Responsibility and Performance of Socially Responsible Investment Funds. Economic Research-Ekonomskai straživanja, 27(1), 882-898.
- Zulkafli, A., Ahmad, Z., & Ermal, E. (2017). The Performance of Socially Responsible Investments in Indonesia: A Study of Kehati Index (SKI). Gadjah Mada International Journal of Business, 19(1), 59-76.
-
-
Conceptualization
Michael Bamidele Fakoya, Segopotje Evonia Malatji
-
Data curation
Michael Bamidele Fakoya, Segopotje Evonia Malatji
-
Formal Analysis
Michael Bamidele Fakoya, Segopotje Evonia Malatji
-
Methodology
Michael Bamidele Fakoya
-
Project administration
Michael Bamidele Fakoya
-
Validation
Michael Bamidele Fakoya
-
Writing – review & editing
Michael Bamidele Fakoya
-
Investigation
Segopotje Evonia Malatji
-
Writing – original draft
Segopotje Evonia Malatji
-
Conceptualization
-
Does board composition have an impact on CSR reporting?
Problems and Perspectives in Management Volume 15, 2017 Issue #2 pp. 19-35 Views: 4455 Downloads: 1718 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯCorporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting plays a key role in management control, particularly in light of the increased demand for non-financial reporting after the financial crisis of 2008–2009. This literature review evaluates 47 empirical studies that concentrate on the influence of several board composition variables on the quantity and quality of CSR reporting. The author briefly introduces the research framework that underpins current empirical studies in this field. This is followed by a discussion of the main variables of board composition: (1) committees (audit and CSR committees), (2) board independence, (3) board expertise, (4) CEO duality, (5) board diversity (gender and foreign diversity), (6) board activity, and (7) board size. The author, then, summarizes the key findings, discusses the limitations of the existing research and offers useful recommendations for researchers, firm practice and regulators.
-
Corporate governance and financial performance: an empirical analysis of selected multinational firms in Nigeria
Gideon Tayo Akinleye , Odunayo Olarewaju , Bamikole Samson Fajuyagbe doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ppm.17(1).2019.02Problems and Perspectives in Management Volume 17, 2019 Issue #1 pp. 11-18 Views: 3384 Downloads: 568 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯThis study focused on corporate governance and performance of selected Nigerian multinational firms from 2012 to 2016. Specifically, the study focused on the effect of board size, activism and committee activism on return on asset and firm growth rate. Secondary data collected from four multinational firms were analyzed via static panel estimation techniques. While board size and board activism exerted significant negative impact on return on asset, committee activism exerted insignificant impact. The results of the study further showed that board size and board activism exert insignificant negative impact on firm’s growth rate, while committee activism insignificantly spurs firm’s growth rate. Decisively, discoveries from this study reflect that corporate governance has significant negative impact on return on asset, but has insignificant influence on the growth rate of Nigerian multinational firms. Based on these findings, the authors recommended that corporate governance dynamics in firms world over should be reconsidered, such that it gives credence to more than just numbers of persons or meetings held, but the main reasons and deliberations in such meetings. It was also recommended that excessive increase in magnitude or frequency of meetings held by board of directors cum committee should be avoided.
-
Impact of corporate governance mechanisms on financial reporting quality: a study of Indian GAAP and Indian Accounting Standards
Faozi A. Almaqtari , Abdulwahid Abdullah Hashed , Mohd Shamim , Waleed M. Al-ahdal doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ppm.18(4).2020.01Problems and Perspectives in Management Volume 18, 2020 Issue #4 pp. 1-13 Views: 2921 Downloads: 607 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯThe present study examines the impact of corporate governance mechanisms on financial reporting quality under Indian GAAP and Indian Accounting Standards (Ind. AS). A sample of 97 companies listed on the Bombay Stock Exchange is selected. Corporate governance mechanisms have been considered as independent variables, and financial reporting quality is the dependent variable. Corporate governance is measured by board effectiveness (board size, independence, diligence, and expertise), audit committee attributes (size, independence, diligence, and expertise), foreign ownership, and audit quality. Descriptive statistics, correlation, and OLS regression are conducted to estimate the results. The study results reveal that board characteristics and audit committee attributes, except for audit committee diligence, have a significant effect on financial reporting quality. However, the impact of board diligence and audit committee attributes is negative. Foreign ownership has no contribution to financial reporting quality, but audit quality has a significant effect. The findings of the study have considerable implications for regulators, policymakers, managers, investors, analysts, and academicians. More emphasis should be given to compliance with Ind. AS, and an oversight body for compliance with Ind. AS should be established.
Acknowledgment
This publication was supported by Deanship of Scientific Research, Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, Alkharj, Saudi Arabia.