نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار، گروه حسابداری، دانشکده علوم اقتصادی و اجتماعی، دانشگاه بوعلی‌سینا، همدان، ایران.

2 دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد، گروه حسابداری، موسسه آموزش عالی الوند، همدان، ایران.

چکیده

در سال‌های اخیر، افشای اطلاعات غیرمالی برای ذینفعان در تصمیم‌گیری اهمیت بیشتری یافته است. افشای اطلاعات غیرمالی شرکت‌ها مانند افشای اطلاعات زیست‌محیطی، اجتماعی و حاکمیتی (ESG) می‌تواند تحت تأثیر ویژگی‌های مدیران و سایر ارکان حاکمیت شرکتی قرار گیرد. بر این اساس هدف پژوهش حاضر بررسی تأثیر تنوع جنسیتی هیئت مدیره بر افشای اطلاعات زیست‌محیطی، اجتماعی و حاکمیتی با نقش تعدیلی ویژگی‌های کمیته حسابرسی است. در این پژوهش داده‌های 78 شرکت پذیرفته شده در بورس اوراق بهادار تهران طی دوره زمانی 1392 تا 1402 (858 سال-شرکت) جمع‌آوری شد و فرضیه‌‌های پژوهش با استفاده از داده‌های ترکیبی و بکارگیری رگرسیون چندگانه مورد آزمون قرار گرفت. یافته‌های پژوهش نشان می‌دهد تنوع جنسیتی در هیئت مدیره تأثیر مثبت و معناداری بر افشای اطلاعات زیست‌محیطی، اجتماعی و حاکمیتی دارد؛ به‌عبارت دیگر با افزایش حضور زنان در هیئت مدیره، شاخص افشای ESG نیز افزایش می‌یابد. همچنین یافته‌های پژوهش نشان داد استقلال و تخصص مالی کمیته حسابرسی رابطه بین تنوع جنسیتی هیئت مدیره و افشای اطلاعات زیست‌محیطی، اجتماعی و حاکمیتی را تقویت و تعدیل می‌نماید؛ ولی اندازه اعضای کمیته حسابرسی بر این رابطه اثر تعدیلی ندارند. این پژوهش بینش‌های ارزشمندی را برای مدیران و سرمایه‌گذاران فراهم می‌کند تا نقش تنوع جنسیتی در هیئت مدیره و کمیته‌های حسابرسی را در افشای ESG ارزیابی کنند و آنها را در تصمیم‌گیری‌های بهتر یاری ‌کند. همچنین، قانون‌گذاران و سیاست‌گذاران می‌توانند سازوکارهای حاکمیت شرکتی را بازنگری کنند تا حضور بیشتر زنان را نه تنها در هیئت مدیره‌های شرکت‌ها، بلکه در کمیته‌های فرعی نیز ترویج کنند تا از حقوق ذینفعان، بیشتر محافظت شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Investigating the Impact of Board Gender Diversity on ESG Disclosure: The Moderating Role of Audit Committee Characteristics

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mohsen Khotanlou 1
  • Mahdi Kazemioloum 1
  • Yasaman Moradi Behjat 2

1 Assistant Prof., Department of Accounting, Faculty of Economics and Social Science, Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamedan, Iran.

2 Master of Accounting, Department of Accounting, Alvand Institute of Higher Education, Hamedan, Iran.

چکیده [English]

In recent years, non-financial disclosure has become increasingly important for stakeholders in making informed decisions. Non-financial disclosures by companies, such as Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) information disclosure, can be influenced by the characteristics of directors and other corporate governance mechanisms. Accordingly, the purpose of this research is to investigate the impact of board gender diversity on ESG disclosure, with a focus on the moderating role of audit committee characteristics. In this study, data from 78 companies listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange from 2013 to 2024 (858 firm-years) were collected, and the research hypotheses were tested using pooled data and multiple regression analysis. The research findings indicate that gender diversity on the board of directors has a positive and significant impact on ESG disclosure. In other words, an increase in the presence of women on the board is associated with a corresponding increase in the ESG disclosure index. The research findings also indicated that the independence and financial expertise of the audit committee moderate the relationship between board gender diversity and ESG disclosure; however, the size of the audit committee members does not have a moderating effect on this relationship. This study offers valuable insights for managers and investors to evaluate the impact of gender diversity on the boards of directors and audit committees in ESG disclosure, and to inform their decision-making. Furthermore, legislators and policymakers can revise corporate governance mechanisms to promote greater inclusion of women not only on company boards but also in sub-committees to protect the rights of stakeholders better. The findings of the present study indicate a low number of female board members in companies listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange (9.2% of observations), which may affect the research results.

Introduction

In 2015, the United Nations introduced the Sustainable Development Goals to address poverty, environmental degradation, inequality, and justice, with the 2030 Agenda promoting sustainability for all stakeholders and guiding companies to shift from profit maximization to sustainable growth. Non-financial disclosures related to environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors have gained strategic importance for stakeholders, including governments, investors, and employees, in decision-making processes. These disclosures address environmental concerns (e.g., green technologies), social issues (e.g., human rights), and governance matters (e.g., board independence). Agency and stakeholder theories emphasize the need for long-term, sustainable perspectives, though some view corporate social responsibility activities as a source of agency problems. In contrast, others see them as a competitive advantage. The board of directors, particularly in terms of its gender diversity, plays a critical role in enhancing ESG disclosures and stakeholder accountability, despite conflicting research findings. The audit committee strengthens transparency and accuracy in ESG reporting. This study examines how board gender diversity, moderated by audit committee characteristics, influences ESG disclosures, thereby contributing to the literature, particularly in the unique political context of Iran.
Research Question: What is the impact of board gender diversity on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) disclosures, with the moderating role of audit committee characteristics?

Literature Review

Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) issues have gained significant importance for companies due to current competitive requirements and stakeholder attention. By disclosing ESG information, companies aim to reduce agency problems and positively impact capital markets. Since ESG disclosure is often voluntary, studying the factors influencing the improvement of its quality is crucial. Research indicates that corporate governance factors, such as the board of directors and audit committees (especially in the context of agency theory), can play a significant role in reducing information asymmetry and conflicts of interest in ESG information disclosure.
Based on the theoretical foundation and prior research, the following hypotheses are formulated:
Hypothesis 1: Gender diversity on the board of directors has a positive and significant impact on ESG disclosure.
Hypothesis 2: The size of the audit committee moderates the relationship between gender diversity on the board of directors and ESG disclosure.
Hypothesis 3: The independence of audit committee members moderates the relationship between gender diversity on the board of directors and ESG disclosure.
Hypothesis 4: The financial expertise of audit committee members moderates the relationship between gender diversity on the board of directors and ESG disclosure.

Methodology

This applied study utilizes data from audited financial statements, explanatory notes, audit committee reports, and board activity reports submitted to the general assembly of shareholders of firms listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange, utilizing the CODAL system. The data were analyzed with EViews software, and multiple regression analysis was applied to test the research hypotheses. The study encompasses all firms listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange over the period from 2013 to 2023.

Results

The research findings indicate that gender diversity on the board of directors has a positive and significant impact on ESG disclosure. In other words, an increase in the presence of women on the board is associated with a corresponding increase in the ESG disclosure index. The research findings also indicated that the independence and financial expertise of the audit committee moderate the relationship between board gender diversity and ESG disclosure; however, the size of the audit committee members does not have a moderating effect on this relationship..

Conclusion

This study offers valuable insights for managers and investors to evaluate the impact of gender diversity on the boards of directors and audit committees in ESG disclosure, and to inform their decision-making. Furthermore, legislators and policymakers can revise corporate governance mechanisms to promote the greater inclusion of women not only on company boards but also in subcommittees, thereby better protecting the rights of stakeholders. The findings of the present study indicate a low number of female board members in companies listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange (9.2% of observations), which may affect the research results

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Audit Committee
  • Board Gender Diversity
  • Environmental
  • Social
  • and Governance Disclosure
  1. اسماعیلی‌کیا، غریبه، ناصری، مهدیس و قنبری، امین. (1403). رابطه بین عوامل اقتضایی و عملکرد پایداری غیرمالی؛ نقش تعدیلی ابعاد رفتاری مدیران. مطالعات تجربی حسابداری مالی، 21 (82)، 43-98. doi: 10.22054/‌qjma.2024.78069.2542
  2. اسماعیلی‌کیا، غریبه و فتحی‌نیا، حسنا. (1404). بررسی تأثیر عملکرد زیست‌محیطی، اجتماعی و راهبری بـر عملکردهـای مـالی و غیرمالی شرکت: نقش تعدیل‌کنندگی ویژگی‌های ساختاری مدیریت. بررسی‌های حسابداری و حسابرسی، 32(1)، 1-29.  10.22059/‌acctgrev.2024.380998.1008999
  3. امری‌اسرمی، محمد، ابراهیمی، سیدکاظم و امینی، حسین. (1403). نقش تعدیلی قدرت رقابت در رابطه بین عملکرد اجتماعی و زیست‌محیطی با عملکرد مالی. مطالعات تجربی حسابداری مالی، 21(82)، 136-99. doi: 10.22054/‌qjma.2024.77772.2533
  4. ایمانی‌برندق، محمد، عبدی، مصطفی و کاظمی‌علوم، مهدی. (1396). بررسی تأثیر تنوع جنسیتی در کمیتۀ حسابرسی بر حق‎الزحمۀ حسابرسیِ شرکت‎های پذیرفته‌شده در بورس اوراق بهادار تهران. بررسی‏‌های حسابداری و حسابرسی، 24(3)، 303-322. 10.22059/‌ACCTGREV.2017.228755.1007561
  5. بختیاری، مسعود. (1402). بررسی تأثیر گزارشگری محیطی، اجتماعی و حاکمیتی بر ادراک ریسک سرمایه‌گذاران. پژوهش‌های کاربردی در گزارشگری مالی. 12(23)، ص 73- 102. https:/‌/‌www.arfr.ir/‌article_192592.html
  6. رضوی، مرضیه، حاجیان نژاد، امین و امیری، هادی. (1403). رابطه عملکرد زیست‌محیطی، اجتماعی و حاکمیتی (ESG) با رفتار احساسی سرمایه‌گذاران باوجود عدم تقارن اطلاعاتی. دانش حسابداری، آماده برای انتشار. doi: 10.22103/‌JAK.2024.23751.4078
  7. عبدی، مصطفی، کاظمی علوم، مهدی، محمدپور زنجانی، مسعود و پرویزی، آرزو. (1398). تنوع جنسیتی اعضای کمیته حسابرسی، هیئت‌مدیره و مدیر مالی و افشای مسئولیت‌پذیری اجتماعی شرکت: آزمون نظریه دیگرگزینی. بررسی‏‌های حسابداری و حسابرسی، 26(4)، 544-569. doi: 10.22059/‌ACCTGREV.2020.281539.1008178
  8. عبدی، مصطفی، کاظمی‌علوم، مهدی، رضائیان، هایده و نیری، هلیا. (1399). تنوع جنسیتی و احتمال تجدید ارائه صورت‌های مالی: آزمون نظریه پویایی گروه. دانش حسابداری مالی، 7(3)، 145-166.  doi: 10.30479/‌JFAK.2020.12241.2602
  9. عبدی، مصطفی، همایون، سعید و کاظمی‌علوم، مهدی. (1399). بررسی تأثیر ویژگی‌های کمیته‌های حسابرسی بر سطح گزارشگری پایداری. دو فصلنامه حسابداری ارزشی و رفتاری، ۵ (۹)، ۳۳۵-۳۶۹. doi: 10.29252/‌aapc.5.9.335
  10. فخاری، حسین، ملکیان، اسفندیار و جفایی رهنی، منیر. (1396). تبیین و رتبه‌بندی مؤلفه‌ها و شاخص‌های گزارشگری زیست‌محیطی، اجتماعی و راهبری شرکتی به روش تحلیل سلسله مراتبی در شرکت‌های پذیرفته‌شده در بورس اوراق بهادار. دو فصلنامه حسابداری ارزشی و رفتاری. ۲ (۴)، ۱۵۳-۱۸۷. doi: 10.29252/‌aapc.2.4.153
  11. مام صالحی، پرویز و اسکندرلی، طاهر. (1398). تنوع جنسیتی اعضای هیئت‌مدیره و ارتباط ارزشی گزارشگری مسئولیت‌پذیری اجتماعی شرکت‌ها. پژوهش‌های تجربی حسابداری، 9(2)، 351-372. doi: 10.22051/‌jera.2018.18419.1889
  12. منشور کمیته حسابرسی. (1391). سازمان بورس و اوراق بهادار، تهران.
  13. مشایخی، بیتا، فرجی، امید، احمدی زرنق، فاطمه و نظری، سعیده. (1404). تأثیر تنوع جنسیتی هیئت‌مدیره بر افشای مسئولیت‌پذیری اجتماعی شرکتی: نقش تعدیل‌گر ارتباطات سیاسی. پژوهش‌های حسابداری و حسابرسی عملیاتی و عملکرد، 5(1)، 53-70. https:/‌/‌jopa.khatam.ac.ir/‌article_221165.html?lang=fa
  14. ولی‌زاده لاریجانی، اعظم، یوسفی اصل، فرزانه، شیرزادی، فاطمه و زمانی، نیلوفر. (1403). گزارش تفسیری مدیریت و مدیریت سود: با تأکید بر نقش مدیران زن. مطالعات تجربی حسابداری مالی، 21(82)، 137-166. doi: 10.22054/‌qjma.2024.77352.2523
  15. Arayakarnkul, P., Chatjuthamard, P., & Treepongkaruna, S. (2022). Board gender diversity, corporate social commitment and sustainability. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 29(5): 1706–1721. doi: 10.1002/‌csr.2320
  16. Abbott, L. J., Parker, S., and G. Peters. (2004). Audit Committee Characteristics and Restatements. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, Vol. 23, No. 1, Pp. 69-87. doi.org/‌10.2308/‌aud.2004.23.1.69
  17. Arayssi, M., Jizi, M., & Tabaja, H. H. (2020). The impact of board composition on the level of ESG disclosures in GCC countries. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 11(1): 137–161. doi: 10.1108/‌SAMPJ-05-2018-0136
  18. Arif, M., Sajjad, A., Farooq, S., Abrar, M., & Joyo, A. S. (2021). The impact of audit committee attributes on the quality and quantity of environmental, social and governance (ESG) disclosures. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 21(3): 497–514. 10.1108/‌CG-06-2020-0243
  19. Atan, R., Alam, M. M., Said, J., & Zamri, M. (2018). The impacts of environmental, social, and governance factors on firm performance: Panel study on Malaysian companies. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 29(2): 182–194. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌MEQ-03-2017-0033
  20. Bacha, S., & Ajina, A. (2020). CSR performance and annual report readability: Evidence from France. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 20(2): 201–215. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌CG-02-2019-0060
  21. Barnea, A., & Rubin, A. (2010). Corporate social responsibility as a conflict between shareholders. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(1): 71–86. 10.1007/‌s10551-010-0496-z
  22. Bhandari, K. R., Ranta, M., & Salo, J. (2022). The resource-based view, stakeholder capitalism, ESG, and sustainable competitive advantage. Business Strategy and the Environment, 31(4): 1525–1537. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1002/‌bse.2967
  23. Bhatia, S., & Marwaha, D. (2022). The influence of board factors and gender diversity on the ESG disclosure score: A study on Indian companies. Global Business Review, 23(6): 1544–1557.https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1177/‌09721509221132067
  24. Bravo, F., & Reguera-Alvarado, N. (2019). Sustainable development disclosure: Environmental, social, and governance reporting and gender diversity in the audit committee. Business Strategy and the Environment, 28(2): 418–429. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1002/‌bse.2258
  25. Buallay, A. M., & AlDhaen, E. S. (2018). The relationship between audit committee characteristics and the level of sustainability report disclosure. In Challenges and opportunities in the digital era: 17th IFIP WG 6.11 conference on e-business, e-services, and e-society (pp. 492–503). Springer International Publishing. 10.1007/‌978-3-030-02131-3_44
  26. Carbone, E., Mussolino, D., & Viganò, R. (2024). Timing the transition: Gender diversity's role in family IPOs. Management Decision, 62(13): 156–187. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌MD-01-2023-0085
  27. Chen, L., Khurram, M. U., Gao, Y., Abedin, M. Z., & Lucey, B. (2023). ESG disclosure and technological innovation capabilities of the Chinese listed companies. Research in International Business and Finance, 65,101974. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1016/‌j.ribaf.2023.101974
  28. Chen, Y., J. Eshleman., and J. Soileau. (2016). Board Gender Diversity and Internal Control Weaknesses. Advances in Accounting, 32(1): 65-90. doi: 10.1016/‌j.adiac.2016.04.005
  29. Cho, M., Kim, H. D., & Kim, Y. (2023). Audit committee accounting financial expertise and stock price crash risk. International Review of Financial Analysis, 90, 102848. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1016/‌j.irfa.2023.102848
  30. De Villiers, C., & Dimes, R. (2021). Determinants, mechanisms and consequences of corporate governance reporting: A research framework. Journal of Management and Governance, 25(1): 7–26. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1007/‌s10997-020-09530-0
  31. Dwekat, A., Seguí-Mas, E., Tormo-Carbó, G., & Carmona, P. (2020). Corporate governance configurations and corporate social responsibility disclosure: Qualitative comparative analysis of audit committee and board characteristics. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27(6): 2879–2892.10.1002/‌csr.2009
  32. Elmghaamez, I. K., Nwachukwu, J., & Ntim, C. G. (2023). ESG disclosure and financial performance of multinational enterprises: The moderating effect of board standing committees. International Journal of Finance & Economics, 1–46. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1002/‌ijfe.2846
  33. Fernandez, W. D., Burnett, M. F., & Gomez, C. B. (2019). Women in the boardroom and corporate social performance: Negotiating the double bind. Management Decision, 57(9): 2201–2222.10.1108/‌MD-08-2017-0738
  34. Galletta, S., Mazzù, S., Naciti, V., & Vermiglio, C. (2022). Gender diversity and sustainability performance in the banking industry. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 29(1), 161–174. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1002/‌csr.2191
  35. García-Sánchez, I.-M., Martínez-Ferrero, J., & García-Meca, E. (2017). Gender diversity, financial expertise, and its effects on accounting quality. Management Decision, 55(2): 347–382. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌MD-02-2016-0090
  36. Groening, C., & Kanuri, V. K. (2013). Investor reaction to positive and negative corporate social events. Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 1852–1860. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1016/‌j.jbusres.2013.02.006
  37. Hill, C. W., & Jones, T. M. (1992). Stakeholder-agency theory. Journal of Management Studies, 29(2): 131–154. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1111/‌j.1467-6486.1992.tb00657.x
  38. Huang, D. Z. (2021). Environmental, social and governance (ESG) activity and firm performance: A review and consolidation. Accounting & Finance, 61(1): 335–360. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1111/‌acfi.12569
  39. Husted, B. W., & de Sousa-Filho, J. M. (2019). Board structure and environmental, social, and governance disclosure in Latin America. Journal of Business Research, 102: 220–227. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1016/‌j.jbusres.2018.01.017
  40. Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (2019). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. In Corporate governance. 77–132. 9781315191157
  41. Jizi, M. I., Salama, A., Dixon, R., & Stratling, R. (2014). Corporate governance and corporate social responsibility disclosure. Journal of Business Ethics, 125: 601–615. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1007/‌s10551-013-1929-2
  42. Karamanou, I., & Vafeas, N. (2005). The association between corporate boards, audit committees, and management earnings forecasts: An empirical analysis. Journal of Accounting Research, 43(3): 453–486. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1111/‌j.1475-679X.2005.00177.x
  43. Khan, M. A. (2022). ESG disclosure and firm performance: A bibliometric and meta analysis. Research in International Business and Finance, 61,101668. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1016/‌j.ribaf.2022.101668
  44. Khatri, I. (2023). Board gender diversity and sustainability performance: Nordic evidence. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 30(3): 1495–1507. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1002/‌csr.2432
  45. Khemakhem, H., Arroyo, P., & Montecinos, J. (2022). Gender diversity on board committees and ESG disclosure: Evidence from Canada. Journal of Management and Governance, 27: 1397–1422. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1007/‌s10997-022-09658-1
  46. Liao, J., Smith, D., & Liu, X. (2019). Female CFOs and accounting fraud: Evidence from China. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 53: 449–463. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1016/‌j.pacfin.2019.01.003
  47. Manita, R., Bruna, M. G., Dang, R., & Houanti, L. H. (2018). Board gender diversity and ESG disclosure: Evidence from the USA. Journal of Applied Accounting Research, 19(2): 206–224. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌JAAR-01-2017-0024
  48. Ma, Y., Ahmad, M. I., & Torelli, R. (2024). Board gender diversity and ESG disclosure: The moderating role of audit committee. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 1–13. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1002/‌csr.2895
  49. McLaughlin, C., Armstrong, S., Moustafa, M. W., & Elamer, A. A. (2021). Audit committee diversity and corporate scandals: Evidence from the UK. International Journal of Accounting & Information Management, 29(5): 734–763. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌IJAIM-01-2021-0024
  50. Mwangi, B. W., Koske, N., & Bonuke, R. (2024). Board Characteristics and Quality of Integrated Reporting of Firms Listed Nairobi Securities Exchange. Economic Research, 8(2), 33-48. doi: 10.21325/‌jotags.2024.1444
  51. Ng, A., Rezaee, Z. (2015). Business Sustainability Performance and Cost of Equity Capital. Journal of Corporate Finance,34: 128-149. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1016/‌j.jcorpfin.2015.08.003
  52. Nielsen, S., & Huse, M. (2010). The contribution of women on boards of directors: Going beyond the surface. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 18(2): 136–148. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1111/‌j.1467-8683.2010.00784.x
  53. Nugroho, D. P. D., Hsu, Y., Hartauer, C., & Hartauer, A. (2024). Investigating the interconnection between environmental, social, and governance (ESG), and corporate social responsibility (CSR) strategies: An examination of the influence on consumer behavior. Sustainability, 16(2): 614. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.3390/‌su16020614
  54. Nuhu, Y., & Alam, A. (2024). Board characteristics and ESG disclosure in energy industry: Evidence from emerging economies. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting, 22(1), 7–28. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌JFRA-02-2023-0107
  55. Pajuelo Moreno, M. L., & Duarte-Atoche, T. (2019). Relationship between sustainable disclosure and performance—An extension of Ullmann's model. Sustainability, 11(16): 4411. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.3390/‌su11164411
  56. Paolone, F., Pozzoli, M., Cucari, N., & Bianco, R. (2023). Longer board tenure and audit committee tenure. How do they impact environmental performance? A European study. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 30(1): 358–368. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1002/‌csr.2359
  57. Pernamasari,R., Chariri, A. (2024).Characteristics of the Audit Committee and the Environmental, Social, Governance (ESG) Performance in Indonesian Companies” in The 3rd International Conference on Business, Economics, and Sustainability Science, KnE Social Sciences, pages 286–302. doi 10.18502/‌kss.v9i21.16716
  58. Pothisarn, T., Chatjuthamard, P., Jiraporn, P., & Papangkorn, S. (2023). Sustainability, asset redeployability, and board gender diversity. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 30(4): 1738–1752. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1002/‌csr.2450
  59. Romano, M., Cirillo, A., Favino, C., & Netti, A. (2020). ESG (environmental, social and governance) performance and board gender diversity: The moderating role of CEO duality. Sustainability, 12(21): 9298. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.3390/‌su12219298
  60. Sanseverino, A., González-Ramírez, J., & Cwik, K. (2024). Do ESG progress disclosures influence investment decisions? International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, 21(1): 107–126. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1057/‌s41310-023-00198-0
  61. Seth, H. and Saxena, A. (2025).Demystifying the nexus of audit committee characteristics and sustainability performance. Managerial Finance, Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌MF-06-2024-0434
  62. Seow, R. Y. C. (2024). Determinants of environmental, social, and governance disclosure: A systematic literature review. Business Strategy and the Environment, 33(3): 2314–2330. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1002/‌bse.3604
  63. Siew, R.Y.J., Balatbat, M.C.A. & Carmichael, D.G. (2016). The Impact of ESG Disclosures and Institutional Ownership on Market Information Asymmetry. Asia-Pacific Journal of Accounting & Economics.23 (4): 432-444. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1080/‌16081625.2016.1170100
  64. Sihombing, T., & Nurhaliza, H. K. (2025). The influence of audit committee characteristics and audit quality on ESG performance with sustainable growth rate as a moderation variable. Corporate Governance and Sustainability Review, 9(3), 45–54. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.22495/‌cgsrv9i3p3
  65. Suttipun, M. (2021). The influence of board composition on environmental, social and governance (ESG) disclosure of Thai listed companies. International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, 18(4): 391–402. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1057/‌s41310-021-00120-6
  66. Tsang, A., Frost, T., & Cao, H. (2022). Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) disclosure: A literature review. The British Accounting Review, 55(1): 101149. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1016/‌j.bar.2022.101149
  67. Valls Martinez, M. D. C., Cruz Rambaud, S., & Parra Oller, I. M. (2019). Gender policies on board of directors and sustainable development. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26(6): 1539–1553. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1002/‌csr.1825
  68. Wang, J., & Sun, J. (2022). The role of audit committees in social responsibility and environmental disclosures: Evidence from Chinese energy sector. International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, 19: 1–16. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1057/‌s41310-021-00131-3
  69. Xie, J., Nozawa, W., Yagi, M., Fujii, H., & Managi, S. (2019). Do environmental, social, and governance activities improve corporate financial performance? Business Strategy and the Environment, 28(2): 286–300. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1002/‌bse.2224
  70. Yorke, S. M., Donkor, A., & Appiagyei, K. (2023). Experts on boards audit committee and sustainability performance. Journal of Cleaner Production, 414: 137553. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1016/‌j.jclepro.2023.137553
  71. Zamil, I. A., Ramakrishnan, S., Jamal, N. M., Hatif, M. A., & Khatib, S. F. A. (2021). Drivers of corporate voluntary disclosure: A systematic review. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting, 21, 267. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌JFRA-04-2021-0110
  72. Zhang, Q., & Wong, J. B. (2022). ESG reputational risks and board monitoring committees. Finance Research Letters, 50, 103325. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1016/‌j.frl.2022.103325
  73. Zharfpeykan, R. and Bai, Y. (2025). Board gender diversity and corporate environmental, social and governance performance. Pacific Accounting Review, 37(2), 243-270. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌PAR-01-2024-0011