Does a Board Characteristic Moderate the Relationship between CSR Practices and Financial Performance? Evidence from European ESG Firms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to examine the potential effect that corporate social responsibility practices (CSR) have on financial performance in ESG firms, using the moderating role of board characteristics. To test the moderating effect of the board characteristics in the relationship between CSR practices and financial performance, we applied linear regressions with panel data using the Thomson Reuters ASSET4 database from European countries in analyzing data of 225 listed companies between 2015 and 2019. The results show that board characteristics partially moderate the relationship between CSR practices and financial performance in European ESG firms. In addition, this study indicates that CSR practices affect the firm’s financial performance positively. The study findings appended a new dimension to governance research that could provide policymakers and regulators with a valuable source of information to strengthen governance mechanisms for better financial performance. Previous studies mostly investigate the direct effect of corporate governance on financial performance. A few studies examine the moderating effect of CSR practice. This paper contributes by investigating the moderating effect of governance mechanisms in the ESG context.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".