ESG Performance and Corporate Governance—The Moderating Role of the Big Four Auditors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of corporate governance on ESG performance in large publicly listed firms in Indonesia from 2016 to 2023. The study adopts both stakeholder-agency theory and resource dependency theory to explore the relationship between sustainability assurance, board governance characteristics, and the extent of ESG performance. Fixed effects regression controlling both industry and year fixed effects is used to measure the relationship between sustainability assurance, corporate governance characteristics, and ESG performance. We find a positive significant relationship between assurance sustainability reports and ESG performance. Additionally, we also document a positive association between sustainability committees and ESG performance. Adopting the Big Four auditors as a moderating variable, we find a positive relationship between gender-diverse boards and firms audited by the Big Four auditors and sustainability performance. This result suggests that firms with gender-diverse boards audited by the Big Four auditors enhance sustainability performance. Additional robustness tests using GMM estimation, conducted to address endogeneity concerns, corroborated the main test results.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".