Accounting and Auditing

Background: The increasing integration of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) factors into financial decision-making has prompted debate over their impact on corporate credit risk. While many studies suggest that ESG performance may enhance firms’ resilience, empirical evidence remains mixed due to data inconsistency and methodological heterogeneity and differences in time horizons over which ESG effects materialise. Methods: The study investigates the relationship between ESG performance and credit risk using a panel of European firms from 2020 to 2024, a phase highly characterised by substantial macroeconomic shocks. The Altman Z-score serves as a proxy for default risk, while ESG data are sourced from Refinitiv Eikon. Four fixed-effects panel regressions are estimated: a baseline model using aggregate ESG scores, an extended model with financial controls, and disaggregated and sector-specific models. Results: The findings indicate that ESG scores—either aggregated or by pillar—show limited statistical significance in explaining variations in the Z-score. In contrast, financial variables such as solvency, liquidity, and cash flow ratios display strong, positive, and significant effects on credit stability. Some heterogeneous sectoral effects emerge: social factors are positive in technology, while governance has a negative impact in basic materials. Conclusions: ESG initiatives may not yield immediate improvements in default risk metrics, particularly over short and crisis-dominated periods, but could enhance financial resilience over time. Combining ESG information with traditional financial ratios remains essential; the results underscore the importance of consistent and high-quality ESG disclosure to reduce measurement error and enhance comparability across firms.

The use of financial derivatives to hedge economic risks presents several operational and financial reporting challenges to corporations. Special hedge accounting treatment is stringent and complex; different accounting treatments may be used for similar instruments, and risk management strategies, expertise, and judgment are necessary in valuing certain instruments; and careful monitoring and internal controls processes and procedures are necessary to ensure that risks are properly hedged. This study examines whether the use and the extent of the use of financial derivatives are associated with audit risk, financial restatements, and internal control weaknesses. Using a sample of over 6000 firms across non-financial industries from 2012 to 2022, I find that derivative use is associated with an increase in audit fees, restatements, and internal control weaknesses. The fair value of total derivatives used is associated with an increase in audit fees and internal control weaknesses. These findings provide evidence on the hidden costs of derivatives; the auditor’s price increased audit risk in audit fees, and the additional resources needed to support derivative hedges expose firms to additional financial reporting and internal control risks.

This study analyses disclosures on materiality in non-financial information (NFI) reporting by examining their likely explanatory factors, including entities’ financial or structural characteristics, governance features, and contextual factors, grounded in a set of relevant theories. Based on archival research and content analysis, this study uses consolidated NFI reports from 2021 of entities listed in the main Euronext indices. The descriptive analysis reveals that while 71% of companies present a materiality matrix, only about half (50%) meet all eight criteria of materiality disclosure, with double materiality being addressed by just 16%. The regression results show that the level of materiality disclosure is significantly and positively associated only with the size of the board of directors, whereas other expected relationships, such as those with firm size, profitability, or debt, were not statistically significant, challenging traditional assumptions from stakeholders, agency, and positive accounting theories. These findings suggest that governance structures may play a more decisive role in transparency regarding materiality than the entities’ financial or structural characteristics. This research contributes to both the academic literature and practice by identifying explanatory factors and empirical patterns in materiality disclosure in NFI reporting, which may be relevant for standard-setting bodies, regulators, auditors, and stakeholders.