Social Performance Disclosed by European Companies: The Role of the Board Attributes and the Country’s Legal System
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
3. Methodology
β4 Board_ PeopleDevelopment + β5 ESG_Controversies
4. Results
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A. Sample Composition–Companies per Country and National Legal Systems
Country | Frequency | Percentage | National Legal Systems |
Austria | 36 | 1.4 | Civil law |
Belgium | 48 | 1.9 | Civil law |
Cyprus | 13 | 0.5 | Common law |
Denmark | 67 | 2.7 | Civil law |
Finland | 81 | 3.2 | Civil law |
France | 181 | 7.3 | Civil law |
Germany | 272 | 10.9 | Civil law |
Greece | 30 | 1.2 | Civil law |
Guernsey | 27 | 1.1 | Common law |
Ireland | 51 | 2.0 | Civil law |
Italy | 134 | 5.4 | Civil law |
Jersey | 11 | 0.4 | Common law |
Luxembourg | 39 | 1.6 | Civil law |
Netherlands | 71 | 2.8 | Civil law |
Norway | 83 | 3.3 | Civil law |
Poland | 42 | 1.7 | Civil law |
Portugal | 14 | 0.6 | Civil law |
Russia | 46 | 1.8 | Civil law |
Spain | 75 | 3.0 | Civil law |
Sweden | 325 | 13.0 | Civil law |
Switzerland | 210 | 8.4 | Civil law |
Ukraine | 1 | 0.0 | Civil law |
United Kingdom | 637 | 25.5 | Common law |
Total | 2494 | 100.0 |
Appendix B. Descriptive Statistics
Descriptive Statistics | |||||||
SocialPerformance_Discl | Country_LegalSystem | Board_Diversity | Board_Inclusion | Board_PeopleDevelopment | Board_Controversies | ||
N | Valid | 2494 | 2494 | 2494 | 2494 | 2494 | 2494 |
Mean | 51.1513 | 0.73 | 33.93 | 16.65 | 39.02 | 99.66 | |
Minimum | 1.7393 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 50 | |
Maximum | 95.6703 | 1 | 84 | 96 | 87 | 100 |
References
- Albert, Michael J. 2020. Capitalism and Earth system governance: An ecological Marxist approach. Global Environmental Politics 20: 37–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amiri, Misagh Haji, Nour Kifo, and Sumeyye Kusakci. 2022. Diversity in the board of directors and the social sustainability pillar of the firm: Evidence from countries with high environmental, social, and governance scores. The International Journal of Organizational Diversity 22: 63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amran, Azlan, and Roszaini Haniffa. 2011. Evidence in development of sustainability reporting: A case of a developing country. Business Strategy and the Environment 20: 141–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aouadi, Amal, and Sylvain Marsat. 2018. Do ESG controversies matter for firm value? Evidence from international data. Journal of Business Ethics 151: 1027–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arayakarnkul, Pochara, Pattanaporn Chatjuthamard, and Sirimon Treepongkaruna. 2022. Board gender diversity, corporate social commitment and sustainability. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 29: 1706–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arayssi, Mahmoud, Mohammad Jizi, and Hala Hussein Tabaja. 2020. The impact of board composition on the level of ESG disclosures in GCC countries. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal 11: 137–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baldini, Maria, Lorenzo Dal Maso, Giovanni Liberatore, Francesco Mazzi, and Simone Terzani. 2018. Role of country-and firm-level determinants in environmental, social, and governance disclosure. Journal of Business Ethics 150: 79–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Balluchi, Federica, Katia Furlotti, and Riccardo Torelli. 2020. Italy towards mandatory sustainability reporting. Voluntary corporate social responsibility disclosure of Italian companies and legislative decree 254/2016 statements. A quantitative analysis of the last 10 years. In Sustainability and Law. General and Specific Aspects. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer International Publishing, pp. 257–274. [Google Scholar]
- Baraibar-Diez, Elisa, and María D. Odriozola. 2019. CSR committees and their effect on ESG performance in UK, France, Germany, and Spain. Sustainability 11: 5077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bebbington, Jan, Shona Russell, and Ian Thomson. 2017. Accounting and sustainable development: Reflections and propositions. Critical Perspectives on Accounting 48: 21–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Behl, Abhishek, P. S. Raghu Kumari, Harnesh Makhija, and Dipasha Sharma. 2021. Locus recommendation using probabilistic matrix factorization techniques. In Exploring the relationship of ESG score and firm value using cross-lagged panel analyses: Case of the Indian energy sector. Annals of Operations Research 17: 1–26. [Google Scholar]
- Bektur, Çisem, and Sabri Burak Arzova. 2022. The effect of women managers in the board of directors of companies on the integrated reporting: Example of Istanbul Stock Exchange (ISE) Sustainability Index. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 12: 638–54. [Google Scholar]
- Berg, Florian, Kornelia Fabisik, and Zacharias Sautner. 2021. Is History Repeating Itself? The(un)predictable Past of ESG Ratings. European Corporate Governance Institute–Finance Working Paper: 708. Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3722087 (accessed on 3 March 2023). [CrossRef]
- Bernile, Gennaro, Vineet Bhagwat, and Scott Yonker. 2018. Board diversity, firm risk, and corporate policies. Journal of Financial Economics 127: 588–612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bernstein, Ruth Sessler, and Diana Bilimoria. 2013. Diversity perspectives and minority nonprofit board member inclusion. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal 32: 636–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bhutta, Nousheen Tariq, and Muhammed Mohtsham Saeed. 2011. Accounting scandals in the context of corporate social reporting. Journal of Database Marketing & Customer Strategy Management 18: 171–84. [Google Scholar]
- Bianchi, Robert J., Michael E. Drew, and Adam N. Walk. 2010. On the Responsible Investment Disclosure Practices of the World’s Largest Pension Funds. Accounting Research Journal 23: 302–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Birindelli, Giuliana, Stefano Dell’Atti, Antonia Patrizia Iannuzzi, and Marco Savioli. 2018. Composition and activity of the board of directors: Impact on ESG performance in the banking system. Sustainability 10: 4699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bose, Satyajit. 2020. Evolution of ESG reporting frameworks. In Values at Work: Sustainable Investing and ESG Reporting, 1st ed. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 13–33. [Google Scholar]
- Budsaratragoon, Pornanong, and Boonlert Jitmaneeroj. 2021. Corporate Sustainability and Stock Value in Asian–Pacific Emerging Markets: Synergies or Tradeoffs among ESG Factors? Sustainability 13: 6458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Buse, Kathleen, Ruth Sessler Bernstein, and Diana Bilimoria. 2016. The influence of board diversity, board diversity policies and practices, and board inclusion behaviors on nonprofit governance practices. Journal of Business Ethics 133: 179–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Campbell, John L. 2007. Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review 32: 946–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Castillo-Merino, David, and Rodríguez-Pérez Gonzalo. 2021. The effects of legal origin and corporate governance on financial firms’ sustainability performance. Sustainability 13: 8233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cepêda, Catarina, Ana Caria, and Lídia Oliveira. 2021. Why Reporting Sustainability: Pressures for Non-Financial Reporting. Paper presented at 7th International Conference on CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance, Lisbon, Portugal, June 23–25; Lisbon: Polytechnic of Lisbon, pp. 50–65. [Google Scholar]
- Chatzinikolaou, Parthena, and Basil Manos. 2012. Review of Existing Methodologies and Tools for Measuring Sustainability in Rural Areas. Available online: http://www.feem-project.net/belpasso_2012/files/studpapers/Paper_Chatzinikolaou.pdf (accessed on 1 April 2023).
- Cillo, Valentina, Gian Luca Gregori, Lucia Michela Daniele, Francesco Caputo, and Nathalie Bitbol-Saba. 2022. Rethinking companies’ culture through knowledge management lens during Industry 5.0 transition. Journal of Knowledge Management 26: 2485–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cornett, Marcia Millon, Otgontsetseg Erhemjamts, and Hassan Tehranian. 2016. Greed or good deeds: An examination of the relation between corporate social responsibility and the financial performance of U.S. commercial banks around the financial crisis. Journal of Banking & Finance 70: 137–59. [Google Scholar]
- DasGupta, Ranjan. 2022. Financial performance shortfall, ESG controversies, and ESG performance: Evidence from firms around the world. Finance Research Letters 46: 102487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davies, Iain A., and Andrew Crane. 2010. Corporate social responsibility in small-and medium-size enterprises: Investigating employee engagement in fair trade companies. Business Ethics: A European Review 19: 126–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deegan, Craig, and Christopher Blomquist. 2006. Stakeholder influence on corporate reporting: An exploration of the interaction between WWF-Australia and the Australian minerals industry. Accounting, Organizations and Society 31: 343–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dorfleitner, Gregor, Christian Kreuzer, and Christian Sparrer. 2020. ESG controversies and controversial ESG: About silent saints and small sinners. Journal of Asset Management 21: 393–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ehlers, Torsten, Ulrike Elsenhuber, Anandakumar Jegarasasingam, and Eric Jondeau. 2022. Deconstructing ESG Scores: How to Invest with your Own Criteria. BIS Working Papers No 1008. Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4058612 (accessed on 10 March 2023).
- Fearnley, Nicholas, and Sid Gray. 2015. National institutional factors and IFRS Implementation in Europe: The case of investment property companies. International Journal of Accounting and Information Management 23: 271–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fernandes, Valérie, Cemil Kuzey, Ali Uyar, and Abdullah S. Karaman. 2022. Board structure policy, board diversity and social sustainability in the logistics and transportation sector. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management. ahead-of-print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ferrell, Allen, Liang Hao, and Luc Renneboog. 2016. Socially responsible firms. Journal of Financial Economics 122: 585–606. [Google Scholar]
- Forest Stewardship Council, and Magnus Boström. 2010. SCORE, 1–69. Available online: http://www.score.su.se/polopoly_fs/1.26403.1320939791!/FSCsocialsustainability.pdf (accessed on 15 May 2023).
- Friede, Gunnar, Timo Busch, and Alexander Bassen. 2015. ESG and financial performance: Aggregated evidence from more than 2000 empirical studies. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 5: 210–33. [Google Scholar]
- Gao, Yongqiang, and Haibin Yang. 2016. Do employees support corporate philanthropy? Evidence from Chinese listed companies. Management and Organization Review 12: 747–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gaviglio, Anna, Mattia Bertocchi, Maria Elena Marescotti, Eugenio Demartini, and Alberto Pirani. 2016. The social pillar of sustainability: A quantitative approach at the farm level. Agricultural and Food Economics 4: 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giambona, Francesca, and Erasmo Vassallo. 2014. Composite indicator of social inclusion for European countries. Social Indicators Research 116: 269–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gray, Rob. 2010. Is accounting for sustainability actually accounting for sustainability and how would we know? An exploration of narratives of organisations and the planet. Accounting, Organizations and Society 35: 47–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gray, Rob, Reza Kouhy, and Simon Lavers. 1995. Corporate social and environmental reporting: A review of the literature and alongitudinal study of UK disclosure. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 8: 47–77. [Google Scholar]
- Gurol, Burcu, and Valentina Lagasio. 2023. Women board members’ impact on ESG disclosure with environment and social dimensions: Evidence from the European banking sector. Social Responsibility Journal 19: 211–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haniffa, Roszaini M., and Terry E. Cooke. 2005. The impact of culture and governance on corporate social reporting. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 24: 391–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ismail, Aida Maria, and Izrul Haida Mohd Latiff. 2019. Board diversity and corporate sustainability practices: Evidence on environmental, social and governance (ESG) reporting. International Journal of Financial Research 10: 31–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jahmane, Abderrahmane, and Brahim Gaies. 2020. Corporate social responsibility, financial instability and corporate financial performance: Linear, non-linear and spillover effects–The case of the CAC 40 companies. Finance Research Letters 34: 101483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jitmaneeroj, Boonlert. 2016. Reform priorities for corporate sustainability: Environmental, social, governance, or economic performance? Management Decision 54: 1497–521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jones, David A., Chelsea R. Willness, and Sarah Madey. 2014. Why are job seekers attracted by corporate social performance? Experimental and field tests of three signal-based mechanisms. Academy of Management Journal 57: 383–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Krištofík, Peter, Marzanna Lament, and Hussam Musa. 2016. The reporting of non-financial information and the rationale for its standardisation. Business Administration and Management 2: 157–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- La Porta, Rafael, and Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes. 1998. Capital markets and legal institutions. In Beyond the Washington Consensus: Institutions Matter. Havard: Harvard University. [Google Scholar]
- Lee, Siew-Peng, and Mansor Isa. 2020. Environmental, social and governance (ESG) practices and performance in Shariah firms: Agency or stakeholder theory? Asian Academy of Management Journal of Accounting & Finance 16: 1–34. [Google Scholar]
- Lehtonen, Markku. 2004. The environmental-social interface of sustainable development: Capabilities, social capital, institutions. Ecological Economics 49: 199–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lindquist, W. Brent, Svetlozar T. Rachev, Yuan Hu, and Abootaleb Shirvani. 2022. Inclusion of ESG Ratings in Optimization. In Advanced REIT Portfolio Optimization: Innovative Tools for Risk Management. Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 227–45. [Google Scholar]
- Littig, Beate, and Erich Griessler. 2005. Social sustainability: A catchword between political pragmatism and social theory. International Journal of Sustainable Development 8: 65–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marsat, Sylvain, and Benjamim Williams. 2014. Does the Market Value Social Pillar? European Financial Management Association (EFMA) Working Paper Number 0296. Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2419387 (accessed on 10 January 2023).
- Melinda, Anna, and Ratna Wardhani. 2020. The effect of environmental, social, governance, and controversies on firms’ value: Evidence from Asia. In Advanced Issues in the Economics of Emerging Markets. Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited, vol. 27, pp. 147–73. [Google Scholar]
- Mia, Parvez, and Abdullah Al Mamun. 2011. Corporate Social Disclosure during the Global Financial Crisis. International Journal of Economics and Finance 3: 174–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Monteiro, Albertina, Catarina Cepêda, and Amélia Silva. 2022a. EU Non-Financial Reporting Research. International Journal of Financial, Accounting, and Management 4: 335–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Monteiro, Albertina Paula, Isabel-María García-Sánchez, and Betariz Aibar-Guzmán. 2022b. Labour Practice, Decent Work and Human Rights Performance and Reporting: The Impact of Women Managers. Journal of Business Ethics 180: 523–42. [Google Scholar]
- Naciti, Valeria. 2019. Corporate governance and board of directors: The effect of a board composition on firm sustainability performance. Journal of Cleaner Production 237: 117727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nekhili, Mehdi, Amal Boukadhaba, Haithem Nagati, and Tawhid Chtioui. 2021. ESG performance and market value: The moderating role of employee board representation. The International Journal of Human Resource Management 32: 3061–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nerantzidis, Michail, Panayiotis Tzeremes, Andreas Koutoupis, and Apostolos Pourgias. 2022. Exploring the black box: Board gender diversity and corporate social performance. Finance Research Letters 48: 102987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nobes, Christopher, and Robert Parker. 2010. Comparative International Accounting, 11th ed. Boston: Pearson Education. [Google Scholar]
- Noja, Gratiela Georgiana, Mirela Cristea, Ioana Banaduc, Gheorghe Preda, and Constantin Stefan Ponea. 2021. The role of employee diversity, inclusion and development for socially responsible management strategies and financial performance of European companies. In Decision-Making in Management: Methods and Behavioral Tools. Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 313–35. [Google Scholar]
- Omodero, Cordelia. 2015. Genesis of Accountability and Its Impact on Accounting. Omodero, Cordelia, Genesis of Accountability and Its Impact on Accounting. Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2626967 (accessed on 3 March 2023).
- Passas, Ioannis, Konstantina Ragazou, Eleni Zafeiriou, Alexandros Garefalakis, and Constantin Zopounidis. 2022. ESG Controversies: A Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis for the Sociopolitical Determinants in EU Firms. Sustainability 14: 12879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pirtea, Marilen Gabriel, Graţiela Georgiana Noja, Mirela Cristea, and Mirela Panait. 2021. Interplay between environmental, social and governance coordinates and the financial performance of agricultural companies. Agricultural Economics 67: 479–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Raucci, Domenico, and Lara Tarquinio. 2020. Sustainability performance indicators and non-financial information reporting. Evidence from the Italian case. Administrative Sciences 10: 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Refinitiv. 2020. Refinitiv Announces the 2020 D&I Index Top 100 Most Diverse & Inclusive Organizations Globally. Refinitiv Website. Available online: https://www.refinitiv.com/en/media-center/press-releases/2020/september/refinitiv-announces-the-2020-d-and-i-index-top-100-most-diverse-and-inclusive-organizations-globally (accessed on 10 January 2023).
- Refinitiv. 2023. Refinitiv Global Diversity and Inclusion Index–Index Methodology. Available online: https://www.refinitiv.com/content/dam/marketing/en_us/documents/fact-sheets/diversity-and-inclusionindex-fact-sheet.pdf (accessed on 5 January 2023).
- Romero, Silvia, Silvia Ruiz, and Belen Fernandez-Feijoo. 2019. Sustainability reporting and stakeholder engagement in Spain: Different instruments, different quality. Business Strategy and the Environment 28: 221–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sachs, Sybille, and Marc Maurer. 2009. Toward dynamic corporate stakeholder responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics 85: 535–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sahin, Özge, Karoline Bax, Claudia Czado, and Sandra Paterlini. 2022. Environmental, Social, Governance scores and the Missing pillar—Why does missing information matter? Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 29: 1782–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Samosir, David Kiki Baringin MT, Etty Murwaningsari, Yvonne Augustine, and Sekar Mayangsari. 2020. The benefit of green building for cost efficiency. International Journal of Financial, Accounting, and Management 1: 209–19. [Google Scholar]
- Shaukat, Amama, Yan Qiu, and Grzegorz Trojanowski. 2016. Board attributes, corporate social responsibility strategy, and corporate environmental and social performance. Journal of Business Ethics 135: 569–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shore, Lynn M., Amy E. Randel, Beth G. Chung, Michelle A. Dean, Karen Holcombe Ehrhart, and Gangaram Singh. 2011. Inclusion and diversity in work groups: A review and model for future research. Journal of Management 37: 1262–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Smith, Joyce van der Laan, Ajay Adhikari, and Rasoul H. Tondkar. 2005. Exploring Differences in Social Disclosures Internationally: A Stakeholder Perspective. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 24: 123–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tamimi, Nabil, and Rose Sebastianelli. 2017. Transparency among S&P 500 companies: An analysis of ESG disclosure scores. Management Decision 55: 1660–80. [Google Scholar]
- Van der Laan, Gerwin, Hans Van Ees, and Arjen Van Witteloostuijn. 2008. Corporate social and financial performance: An extended stakeholder theory, and empirical test with accounting measures. Journal of Business Ethics 79: 299–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Velte, Patrick. 2016. Women on management board and ESG performance. Journal of Global Responsibility 7: 98–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Velte, Patrick. 2017. Does ESG performance have an impact on financial performance? Evidence from Germany. Journal of Global Responsibility 8: 169–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Venturelli, Andrea, Fabio Caputo, Simona Cosma, Rossella Leopizzi, and Simone Pizz. 2017. Directive 2014/95/EU: Are Italian companies already compliant? Sustainability 9: 1385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Weber, James, and Jeffrey Gladstone. 2014. Rethinking the corporate financial–social performance relationship: Examining the complex, multistakeholder notion of corporate social performance. Business and Society Review 119: 297–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wood, Donna J., and Raymond E. Jones. 1995. Stakeholder mismatching: A theoretical problem in empirical research on corporate social performance. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis 3: 229–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Model Summary b | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Model | R | R Square | Adjusted R-Squared | Estimate Standard Error | Durbin-Watson |
1 | 0.788 a | 0.620 | 0.619 | 13.174200 | 0.620 |
ANOVA a | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Model | Sum of Squares | Df | Mean Square | Z | Sig. | |
1 | Regression | 704,850.846 | 5 | 140,970.169 | 812.539 | 0.000 b |
Residue | 431,651.545 | 2488 | 173.493 | |||
Total | 1,136,502.391 | 2493 |
Coefficients a | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Model | Hypothesis | Signal | Unstandardized Coefficients | Standardized Coefficients | t | Sig. | Collinearity Statistics | |||
B | Error | Beta | Tolerance | VIF | ||||||
1 | (Constant) | 55.657 | 8.773 | 6.344 | 0.000 | 55.657 | 8.773 | |||
Country_LegalSystem | H1 | (+) | 1.155 | 0.598 | 0.024 | 1.962 | 0.0493 | 1.155 | 0.598 | |
Board_Diversity | H2 | (+) | 0.607 | 0.021 | 0.434 | 28.871 | 0.000 | 0.607 | 0.021 | |
Board_Inclusion | H3 | (+) | 0.184 | 0.015 | 0.169 | 12.116 | 0.000 | 0.184 | 0.015 | |
Board_People Diversity | H4 | (+) | 0.330 | 0.014 | 0.350 | 23.403 | 0.000 | 0.330 | 0.014 | |
Board_Controversies | H5 | (−) | −0.420 | 0.087 | −0.060 | −4.813 | 0.000 | −0.420 | 0.087 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Monteiro, A.P.; Cepêda, C.; Pereira, C.; Silva, A. Social Performance Disclosed by European Companies: The Role of the Board Attributes and the Country’s Legal System. J. Risk Financial Manag. 2023, 16, 284. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm16060284
Monteiro AP, Cepêda C, Pereira C, Silva A. Social Performance Disclosed by European Companies: The Role of the Board Attributes and the Country’s Legal System. Journal of Risk and Financial Management. 2023; 16(6):284. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm16060284
Chicago/Turabian StyleMonteiro, Albertina Paula, Catarina Cepêda, Cláudia Pereira, and Amélia Silva. 2023. "Social Performance Disclosed by European Companies: The Role of the Board Attributes and the Country’s Legal System" Journal of Risk and Financial Management 16, no. 6: 284. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm16060284