Are sustainable firms more profitable during COVID-19? Recent global evidence of firms in developed and emerging economies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This paper investigates whether sustainability performance (SP) protects financial performance (FP) for firms in both developed and emerging economies during the COVID-19-induced economic downturn. Design/methodology/approach Using a recent sample of firms in 34 countries between 2003 and 2021, the authors employ ordinary least squares regressions, moderations and the Heckman two-step method to test the hypotheses. Findings Firms with strong SP have higher FP in developed and emerging economies in the upcoming year. During the COVID-19 crisis in 2020–2021, the impact of sustainability on FP is pronounced in developed but not in emerging economies. Furthermore, cross-listings expose firms in emerging economies to high-standard institutional mechanisms in developed economies. Thus, sustainable firms in emerging economies cross-listed on European stock exchanges are more profitable. Practical implications For regulators and standard setters, the global-level comparative analysis helps them find solutions that may assist firms in improving SP globally (e.g. mandatory reporting) and enduring crises resiliently. For institutional investors, the study reveals the relatively different impact of sustainability risk for firms in developed and emerging economies. For practitioners and private sector firms, this study contributes to the dialogue on what makes firms more resilient in COVID-19. Although COVID-19 might be temporary, the lessons learned could protect firms from future crises. Originality/value The authors contribute to the contingency perspective between sustainability and financial performance by providing recent empirical evidence in a global setting during the COVID-19 pandemic. The authors demonstrate how different external institutional mechanisms (rule-based governance and relation-based governance) and cross-listing affect the SP-FP relationship during a crisis. The authors extend the knowledge in crisis management literature with a comparative study and fill the research gap on how SP affects FP for firms in emerging economies compared to developed economies.
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 | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".