The Mediating Role of Green Innovation and Investor Sentiment in Climate Related Risks on Sustainability Reporting: Evidence from the Indonesian Context
Keywords:climate related risks, sustainability reporting, green innovation, investor sentiment
Objective: The purpose of this research is that companies must consider the impact that occurs on transition risks or physical risks and then need to know opportunities in risk mitigation efforts, so that it is hoped that there will be a need for opportunities from risks related to climate change. impact on how investors react and the innovations that will be created.
Methodology: Sample criteria are financial sector companies and companies that have completed sustainability reporting. This research collected 430 data from 740 companies that met the criteria. Data was collected from the 2021-2022 sustainability report.
Results: The results of this analysis provide important insights into the role of green innovation and Investor Sentiment in the relationship between Climate Change Related Risks and sustainability reporting.
Conclusion: These conclusions can help companies understand the factors that contribute to the relationship between Climate-related risks and sustainability reporting, as well as the potential impact of green innovation and investor sentiment. The implementation of sustainability reporting is expected to encourage companies to communicate sustainable practices, environmental performance, social impacts and corporate governance more transparently to stakeholders. This strategy will create a higher level of transparency in the company's operations and impact. There are several important implications for companies and practitioners when designing business strategies that focus on sustainability.
Adams, C. (2016). Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) risk, strategy, corporate reporting and board oversight: interviews with Board Directors. In Proceedings of the 20th Conference of the Environmental and Sustainability Management Accounting Network (EMAN) (pp. 9–16). research.lancs.ac.uk. https://eprints.lancs.ac.uk/id/eprint/82229/1/20th_EMAN_conference_proceedings_V03.pdf#page=9
Azapagic, A. (2004). Developing a framework for sustainable development indicators for the mining and minerals industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 12(6), 639–662. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-6526(03)00075-1
Bezabih, M., & Sarr, M. (2013). Risk Preferences and Environmental Uncertainty: Implications for Crop Diversification Decisions in Ethiopia Risk Preferences and Environmental Uncertainty: Implications for Crop Diversification Decisions in Ethiopia *.
Broadbent, P., Thomson, R., Kopasker, D., McCartney, G., Meier, P., Richiardi, M., McKee, M., & Katikireddi, S. V. (2023). The public health implications of the cost-of-living crisis: outlining mechanisms and modelling consequences. The Lancet Regional Health - Europe, 27, 100585. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LANEPE.2023.100585
Chen, H. Y., & Yang, S. S. (2020). Do Investors exaggerate corporate ESG information? Evidence of the ESG momentum effect in the Taiwanese market. Pacific Basin Finance Journal, 63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pacfin.2020.101407
Cuomo, M. T., Caprino, R. M., Genovino, C., & Tortora, D. (2020). Climate change, environmental auditing, and corporate/brand strategy. Sustainable Branding: Ethical, Social, and Environmental Cases and Perspectives, 115–127. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780367855703-10
Dhasmana, S., Ghosh, S., & Kanjilal, K. (2023). Does investor sentiment influence ESG stock performance? Evidence from India. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, 37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbef.2023.100789
Dos Santos, R. P., De Almeida, N. C. D. A., De Oliveira, L. C., Pacheco, C. S. G. R., & Moreira, M. B. (2023). A TUTELA AMBIENTAL DE PALEOECOSSISTEMAS DO RIO SÃO FRANCISCO/BRASIL À LUZ DO DIREITO AMBIENTAL. Revista de Gestão Social e Ambiental, 17(9), e04094. https://doi.org/10.24857/rgsa.v17n9-017
Freeman, R. E., & David, L. R. (1983). Stockholders and Stakeholders: A New Perspective on Corporate Governance. California Management Review, 25(3), 88–106. https://doi.org/10.2307/41165018
Freeman, R. E., Harrison, J. S., Wicks, A. C., Parmar, B. L., & ... (2010). Stakeholder theory: The state of the art. books.google.com. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=xF8-WN1QlIMC&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&dq=sustainable+development+goals+social+economic+dan+enviromental+triple+bottom+line&ots=ZXAYZ2tz5O&sig=Y9fKhip7v_cjaqXtJFrAkiUz114
Gede, I., & Wicaksana, W. (n.d.). Tantangan Geoekonomi Global dan Prospek Integrasi Ekonomi ASEAN.
Gill, J. C. (2017). Geology and the Sustainable Development Goals. In Episodes (Vol. 40, Issue 1, pp. 70–76). teriin.org. https://doi.org/10.18814/epiiugs/2017/v40i1/017010
Hoepner, A. G. F., & Schneider, F. I. (2022). EU Green Taxonomy Data – A First Vendor Survey. The Economists’ Voice, 0(0), 221–234. https://doi.org/10.1515/ev-2022-0022
In, S. Y., Weyant, J. P., & Manav, B. (2022). Pricing climate-related risks of energy investments. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111881
Jacobsen, B. (2013). Institutional investor support for climate change resolutions: A new challenge to capitalism or co-opted activism? Critical Studies on Corporate Responsibility, Governance and Sustainability, 5, 279–308. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2043-9059(2013)0000005020
Kautsarina, Hidayanto, A. N., Anggorojati, B., Abidin, Z., & Phusavat, K. (2020). Data modeling positive security behavior implementation among smart device users in Indonesia: A partial least squares structural equation modeling approach (PLS-SEM). Data in Brief, 30, 105588. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.DIB.2020.105588
Keleş, E., & Çetin, A. (2018). Corporate Social Responsibility, Investor Sentiment, and Stock Returns. In Accounting, Finance, Sustainability, Governance and Fraud (pp. 443–462). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4502-8_18
Kennedy, P. S. J., Sutrasna, Y., & Haetami, H. (2022). Geo-ekonomi: Dampak Terbentuknya Pakta Trilateral AUKUS terhadap ASEAN. Journal of Business and Economics Research (JBE), 3(2), 108–116. https://doi.org/10.47065/jbe.v3i2.1689
Kumar, A., & Dwidvedi, A. K. (2023). The Development and Effects of Environmental Law on Green Governance. Journal of Law and Sustainable Development, 11(6), e1182. https://doi.org/10.55908/sdgs.v11i6.1182
Laplume, A. O., Sonpar, K., & Litz, R. A. (2008). Stakeholder theory: Reviewing a theory that moves us. In Journal of Management (Vol. 34, Issue 6, pp. 1152–1189). https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308324322
Li, D., Huang, M., Ren, S., Chen, X., & Ning, L. (2018). Environmental Legitimacy, Green Innovation, and Corporate Carbon Disclosure: Evidence from CDP China 100. Journal of Business Ethics, 150(4), 1089–1104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3187-6
Li, D., Tang, F., & Jiang, J. (2019). Does environmental management system foster corporate green innovation? The moderating effect of environmental regulation. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 31(10), 1242–1256. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2019.1602259
Mappong, Z. (2023). Regulation on the Fund of Corporate Social and Environmental Responsibility. Revista de Gestão Social e Ambiental, 17(9), e03675. https://doi.org/10.24857/rgsa.v17n9-020
Mikkelsen, B. (2012). Methods for Development Work and Research: A New Guide for Practitioners. In Methods for Development Work and Research: A New Guide for Practitioners. books.google.com. https://doi.org/10.4135/9788132108566
Nitescu, D. C., & Cristea, M. A. (2020). Environmental, social and governance risks-New challenges for the banking business sustainability. Amfiteatru Economic, 22(55), 692–706. https://doi.org/10.24818/EA/2020/55/692
O’Dwyer, B., & Unerman, J. (2020). Shifting the focus of sustainability accounting from impacts to risks and dependencies: researching the transformative potential of TCFD reporting. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 33(5), 1113–1141. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-02-2020-4445
Peng, L. S., & Isa, M. (2020). Environmental, social and governance (Esg) practices and performance in shariah firms: Agency or stakeholder theory? Asian Academy of Management Journal of Accounting and Finance, 16(1), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.21315/aamjaf2020.16.1.1
Rahman, M. A., Ahmad, R., & Ismail, I. (2022). Does the US regional greenhouse gas initiative affect green innovation? Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(6), 15689–15707. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-23189-0
Sacconi, L. (2011). A Rawlsian View of CSR and the Game Theory of its Implementation (Part I): the Multi-stakeholder Model of Corporate Governance. Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Governance, 157–193. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230302112_7
Shahzad, M., Qu, Y., Rehman, S. U., & Zafar, A. U. (2022). Adoption of green innovation technology to accelerate sustainable development among manufacturing industry. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 7(4), 100231. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JIK.2022.100231
Wang, G., Yu, G., & Shen, X. (2021). The effect of online environmental news on green industry stocks: The mediating role of investor sentiment. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, 573. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2021.125979
Wang, J., Ma, M., Dong, T., & Zhang, Z. (2023). Do ESG ratings promote corporate green innovation? A quasi-natural experiment based on SynTao green Finance’s ESG ratings. International Review of Financial Analysis, 102623. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2023.102623
Wen, J., & Song, B. (2017). Corporate ethical branding on YouTube: CSR communication strategies and brand anthropomorphism. Journal of Interactive Advertising. https://doi.org/10.1080/15252019.2017.1295291
Zhang, Y., & Li, X. (2022). The Impact of the Green Finance Reform and Innovation Pilot Zone on the Green Innovation—Evidence from China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(12). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19127330
Zhao, Y., Zhao, Z., Qian, Z., Zheng, L., Fan, S., & Zuo, S. (2023). Is cooperative green innovation better for carbon reduction? Evidence from China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 394, 136400. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2023.136400
How to Cite
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1. Authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms: the author(s) authorize(s) the publication of the text in the journal;
2. The author(s) ensure(s) that the contribution is original and unpublished and that it is not in the process of evaluation by another journal;
3. The journal is not responsible for the views, ideas and concepts presented in articles, and these are the sole responsibility of the author(s);
4. The publishers reserve the right to make textual adjustments and adapt texts to meet with publication standards.
5. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right to first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons Atribuição NãoComercial 4.0 internacional, which allows the work to be shared with recognized authorship and initial publication in this journal.
6. Authors are allowed to assume additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal (e.g. publish in institutional repository or as a book chapter), with recognition of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
7. Authors are allowed and are encouraged to publish and distribute their work online (e.g. in institutional repositories or on a personal web page) at any point before or during the editorial process, as this can generate positive effects, as well as increase the impact and citations of the published work (see the effect of Free Access) at http://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.html
• 8. Authors are able to use ORCID is a system of identification for authors. An ORCID identifier is unique to an individual and acts as a persistent digital identifier to ensure that authors (particularly those with relatively common names) can be distinguished and their work properly attributed.