Climate Sentiment Analysis on the Disclosures of the Corporations Listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange
Bibliographic record
Abstract
International organizations have highlighted the importance of consistent and reliable environment, social and governance (ESG) disclosure and metrics to inform business strategy and investment decisions. Greater corporate disclosure is a positive signal to investors who prioritize sustainable investment. In this study, economic and climate sentiment are extracted from the integrated and sustainability reports of the top 40 corporates listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange, employing domain-specific natural language processing. The intention is to clarify the complex interactions between climate risk, corporate disclosures, financial performance and investor sentiment. The study provides valuable insights to regulators, accounting professionals and investors on the current state of disclosures and future actions required in South Africa. A time series analysis of the sentiment scores indicates a noticeable change in the corporates’ disclosures from climate-related risks in the earlier years to climate-related opportunities in recent years, specifically in the banking and mining sectors. The trends are less pronounced in sectors with good ESG ratings. An exploratory regression study reveals that climate and economic sentiments contain information that explain stock price movements over the longer term. The results have important implications for asset allocation and offer an interesting direction for future research. Monitoring the sentiment may provide early-warning signals of systemic risk, which is important to regulators given the impact on financial stability.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".