MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4412693454 · doi:10.3390/jrfm18080415

Value Creation Through Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Disclosures

2025· article· en· W4412693454 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Amina Hamdouni

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Social Responsibility Reporting
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAl-Imam Muhammad Ibn Saud Islamic University
KeywordsCorporate governanceValue (mathematics)BusinessEnvironmental governanceValue creationEnvironmental resource managementAccountingEnvironmental planningEnvironmental scienceFinanceBusiness administrationStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the impact of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) disclosure on value creation in a balanced panel of 100 non-financial Sharia-compliant firms listed on the Saudi Stock Exchange over the period 2014–2023. The analysis employs a combination of econometric techniques, including fixed effects models with Driscoll–Kraay standard errors, Pooled Ordinary Least Squares (POLS) with Driscoll–Kraay standard errors and industry and year dummies, and two-step system generalized method of moments (GMM) estimation to address potential endogeneity and omitted variable bias. Value creation is measured using Tobin’s Q (TBQ), Return on Assets (ROA), and Return on Equity (ROE). The models also control for firm-specific variables such as firm size, leverage, asset tangibility, firm age, growth opportunities, and market capitalization. The findings reveal that ESG disclosure has a positive and statistically significant effect on firm value across all three performance measures. Furthermore, firm size significantly moderates this relationship, with larger Sharia-compliant firms experiencing greater value gains from ESG practices. These results align with agency, stakeholder, and signaling theories, emphasizing the role of ESG in enhancing transparency, reducing information asymmetry, and strengthening stakeholder trust. The study provides empirical evidence relevant to policymakers, investors, and firms striving to achieve Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030 sustainability goals.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.228 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial management→Same topicCorporate Social Responsibility Reporting→French-language works237,207→