Preprint Article Version 1 Preserved in Portico This version is not peer-reviewed

Climate Change and Corporate Governance – Did We Get It All Wrong?

Version 1 : Received: 17 September 2023 / Approved: 18 September 2023 / Online: 18 September 2023 (07:11:58 CEST)

How to cite: Dilling, P.F.; Harris, P.; Caykoylu, S. Climate Change and Corporate Governance – Did We Get It All Wrong?. Preprints 2023, 2023091125. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202309.1125.v1 Dilling, P.F.; Harris, P.; Caykoylu, S. Climate Change and Corporate Governance – Did We Get It All Wrong?. Preprints 2023, 2023091125. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202309.1125.v1

Abstract

The objective of this study was to identify the factors determining a company’s corporate governance related to climate change. We analyzed the effect of various sustainability corporate governance variables on the disclosure level of climate change governance. These variables included facts such as having a dedicated sustainability executive and board committee, the mediating effect of female representation on the board of directors, number of reporting years according to TCFD, membership in a sustainability index, MSCI ESG rating, the existence of a corporate climate transition plan, a mention of the UN Global Compact and GRI, company location, as well as company size and profitability. By adopting a multi-theoretical framework that included stakeholder theory as well the legitimacy and agency theory, the underlying research study used a sample of 100 of the largest global companies by market capitalization and their reporting for the year 2020. Based on 1,400 observations for fiscal year 2020 and using correlation analysis, univariate and linear multiple regressions, we find a positive association between having a climate transition plan in place, being a leader in sustainability according to MSCI ratings, and being a DJSI constituent and the propensity to disclose information on governance for climate change. In addition, we find a company with a dedicated sustainability executive show an increased tendency to be transparent on climate governance issues. Furthermore, having a company location in a developed country is significantly and positively associated with climate change governance. Surprisingly, gender diversity in the corporate board or having a sustainability board committee did not show any significant correlation between a higher climate change governance level. The same was true for companies being active in either the extractive or non-extractive sector. Companies referring to the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) or UN Global Compact also did not score higher in climate change governance. Neither did corporate profitability or size play a significant role. Our results are robust to variations and provide valuable insights for researchers, academics, executives, practitioners as well as regulators. As more and more companies are shifting towards a climate change reporting framework, it is of paramount importance that we are able to determine the contributing variables that lead to effective climate change corporate governance. Our results are inconsistent with stakeholder theory and are strongly suggesting that a diversified board and the existence of a sustainability committee that meets often/sufficiently may not necessarily lead to a higher level of transparency/quality regarding climate change. While more research is needed, knowing that a dedicated sustainability executive as well as having a climate plan in place can make a difference in climate change reporting, can be very beneficial to many corporate stakeholders. Given the current urgent climate change situation and the crucial role that corporation play in it, dedicated sustainability positions and committees need to be established. The findings could be useful for managers as well as governmental standards setter and regulators who are interested in improving corporate practices dealing with climate change. This study applies STATA software with various regression models to empirically test the relationship between CG and other variables and corporate climate change reporting.

Keywords

climate change; corporate governance, oversight; non-financial reporting, corporate social responsibility (CSR); sustainability; gender diversity; sustainability board committee, r; voluntary disclosure theory; signaling theory; Hofstede’s cultural’s dimensions theory, institutional theory; Gender socialization theory; Resource dependence theory; Upper echelon theory, social innovation theory; Carbon emissions, CSR disclosure

Subject

Business, Economics and Management, Business and Management

Comments (0)

We encourage comments and feedback from a broad range of readers. See criteria for comments and our Diversity statement.

Leave a public comment
Send a private comment to the author(s)
* All users must log in before leaving a comment
Views 0
Downloads 0
Comments 0
Metrics 0


×
Alerts
Notify me about updates to this article or when a peer-reviewed version is published.
We use cookies on our website to ensure you get the best experience.
Read more about our cookies here.