Exploring the relationship between ESG Practices and Financial Performance of Vietnamese Companies

Article Sidebar

PDF
DOI: https://doi.org/10.28924/2291-8639-22-2024-214
Published: Nov 27, 2024
Cite as:
Tang My Sang, Nguyen Tien Hung, Exploring the relationship between ESG Practices and Financial Performance of Vietnamese Companies, Int. J. Anal. Appl., 22 (2024), 214.

Main Article Content

Tang My Sang, Nguyen Tien Hung

Abstract

This study investigates the relationship between ESG practices and financial performance among the top 100 companies in Vietnam, as listed in the VN100 Index during 2017-2023. The authors use the Pooled OLS, Fixed Effects Model, and Random Effects Model approaches. The analysis reveals no statistically significant relationship between ESG and financial performance. The findings underscore the influence of traditional financial factors such as firm age, firm size, financial leverage, and economic growth rate, highlighting their importance in financial assessments. This paper adds to the increasing body of research on ESG performance in emerging markets by arguing that to promote deeper ESG integration, there is a need for increased regulatory support as well as investor education. The increasing influence of global sustainability norms necessitates an understanding of these dynamics within emerging markets such as Vietnam to align corporate strategies with investor expectations and international standards. Additional research is suggested to track how ESG factors affect financial performance as market conditions and investor perceptions shift.

Article Details

References

  1. H. Ahmad, M. Yaqub, S.H. Lee, Environmental-, Social-, and Governance-Related Factors for Business Investment and Sustainability: A Scientometric Review of Global Trends, Environment, Dev. Sustain. 26 (2023), 2965–2987. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-023-02921-x.
  2. S. Arvidsson, J. Dumay, Corporate ESG Reporting Quantity, Quality and Performance: Where to Now for Environmental Policy and Practice?, Bus. Strateg. Environ. 31 (2022), 1091–1110. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2937.
  3. A.M. Gerged, R. Salem, E. Beddewela, How Does Transparency into Global Sustainability Initiatives Influence Firm Value? Insights from Anglo‐American Countries, Bus. Strat. Environ. 32 (2023), 4519–4547. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3379.
  4. M.-T. Phung, V.-T. Dao, K.-T. Mai, Dataset for Analysing the ESG-Oriented Technical Efficiency of VNSI Listed Companies, Data Brief 52 (2024), 109832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2023.109832.
  5. H. Al Amosh, S.F.A. Khatib, COVID‐19 Impact, Financial and ESG Performance: Evidence from G 20 Countries, Bus. Strat. Dev. 6 (2023), 310–321. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsd2.240.
  6. M.A. Khalil, R. Khalil, M.K. Khalil, Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) - Augmented Investments in Innovation and Firms’ Value: A Fixed-Effects Panel Regression of Asian Economies, China Finance Rev. Int. 14 (2024), 76–102. https://doi.org/10.1108/CFRI-05-2022-0067.
  7. A. Raghunandan, S. Rajgopal, Do ESG Funds Make Stakeholder-Friendly Investments?, Rev. Account. Stud. 27 (2022), 822–863. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11142-022-09693-1.
  8. L. Ho, V.H. Nguyen, T.L. Dang, ESG and Firm Performance: Do Stakeholder Engagement, Financial Constraints and Religiosity Matter?, J. Asian Bus. Econ. Stud. 31 (2024), 263–276. https://doi.org/10.1108/JABES-08-2023-0306.
  9. B.A. Alareeni, A. Hamdan, ESG Impact on Performance of US S&P 500-Listed Firms, Corp. Gov. Int. J. Bus. Soc. 20 (2020), 1409–1428. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-06-2020-0258.
  10. E. Saygili, S. Arslan, A.O. Birkan, ESG Practices and Corporate Financial Performance: Evidence from Borsa Istanbul, Borsa Istanbul Rev. 22 (2022), 525–533. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bir.2021.07.001.
  11. N. Najia, H. Taher, G.A. Elkader, The Impact of Socio-Cultural and Environmental Deterioration Factors on Economic Sustainability in G7 Countries, Int. J. Energy Econ. Policy 14 (2024), 141–148. https://doi.org/10.32479/ijeep.16646.
  12. I. Dovbischuk, Innovation-Oriented Dynamic Capabilities of Logistics Service Providers, Dynamic Resilience and Firm Performance during the COVID-19 Pandemic, Int. J. Logist. Manag. 33 (2022), 499–519. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLM-01-2021-0059.
  13. M. Almashhadani, H. Almashhadani, H.A. Almashhadani, The Beneficial of Firm Size, Board Size, Ownership Structure, and Independence in Developing Markets’ Firm Performance: Evidence from Asia, Int. J. Bus. Manag. Invent. 11 (2022), 88–92.
  14. D. Thi Phuong Nguyen, L. Thi Huong Nguyen, A. Thi Mai Nguyen, L. Le Thanh Phan, Factors Affecting the Readiness for ESG Reporting in Vietnamese Enterprises, Probl. Perspect. Manag. 22 (2024), 263–275. https://doi.org/10.21511/ppm.22(3).2024.21.
  15. S.Y. Yousafzai, G.R. Foxall, J.G. Pallister, Explaining Internet Banking Behavior: Theory of Reasoned Action, Theory of Planned Behavior, or Technology Acceptance Model?, J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 40 (2010), 1172–1202. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2010.00615.x.
  16. B. Nayak, S.S. Bhattacharyya, B. Krishnamoorthy, Integrating the Dialectic Perspectives of Resource-Based View and Industrial Organization Theory for Competitive Advantage – a Review and Research Agenda, J. Bus. Ind. Mark. 38 (2023), 656–679. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-06-2021-0306.
  17. K.R. Bhandari, M. Ranta, J. Salo, The Resource‐based View, Stakeholder Capitalism, ESG, and Sustainable Competitive Advantage: The Firm’s Embeddedness into Ecology, Society, and Governance, Bus. Strat. Environ. 31 (2022), 1525–1537. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2967.
  18. D.Z. Huang, An Integrated Theory of the Firm Approach to Environmental, Social and Governance Performance, Account. Finance 62 (2022), 1567–1598. https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.12832.
  19. R.E. Freeman, A Stakeholder Theory of the Modern Corporation, Perspect. Bus. Ethics Sie, 3 (2001), 38–48.
  20. T. Donaldson, L.E. Preston, The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence and Implications, in: M. Clarkson (Ed.), The Corporation and Its Stakeholders, University of Toronto Press, 1998: pp. 173–204. https://doi.org/10.3138/9781442673496-011.
  21. W. Azmi, M.K. Hassan, R. Houston, M.S. Karim, ESG Activities and Banking Performance: International Evidence from Emerging Economies, J. Int. Financ. Mark. Inst. Money 70 (2021), 101277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intfin.2020.101277.
  22. N. Naeem, S. Cankaya, R. Bildik, Does ESG Performance Affect the Financial Performance of Environmentally Sensitive Industries? A Comparison between Emerging and Developed Markets, Borsa Istanbul Rev. 22 (2022), S128–S140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bir.2022.11.014.
  23. C. Wang, The Relationship between ESG Performance and Corporate Performance - Based on Stakeholder Theory, SHS Web Conf. 190 (2024), 03022. https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/202419003022.
  24. G. Friede, T. Busch, A. Bassen, ESG and Financial Performance: Aggregated Evidence from More than 2000 Empirical Studies, J. Sustain. Financ. Invest. 5 (2015), 210–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/20430795.2015.1118917.
  25. A. Citterio, T. King, The Role of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) in Predicting Bank Financial Distress, Finance Res. Lett. 51 (2023), 103411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2022.103411.
  26. H.R. Mian, K. Hewage, R. Sadiq, Responsible Financing and Investment: Identification, Development, and Assessment of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Metrics, Sustain. Futures 8 (2024), 100246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sftr.2024.100246.
  27. S. Dsouza, K. Krishnamoorthy, Boosting Corporate Value through ESG Excellence in Oil and Gas Sector, Int. J. Energy Econ. Policy 14 (2024), 335–346. https://doi.org/10.32479/ijeep.16714.
  28. K. Albitar, K. Hussainey, N. Kolade, A.M. Gerged, ESG Disclosure and Firm Performance before and after IR: The Moderating Role of Governance Mechanisms, Int. J. Account. Inf. Manag. 28 (2020), 429–444. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJAIM-09-2019-0108.
  29. Y. Shen, ESG and Firm Performance: A Literature Review, BCP Bus. Manag. 46 (2023), 283–288. https://doi.org/10.54691/bcpbm.v46i.5107.
  30. K.L.Y. Ming, Y. Vaicondam, A.M.A.A. Mustafa, S.N.M. Roslan, S. Yi, K. Chopra, P. Khanna, ESG Integration and Financial Performance: Evidence from Malaysia’s Leading Companies, Int. J. Energy Econ. Policy 14 (2024), 487–494. https://doi.org/10.32479/ijeep.16706.
  31. N.P. Tran, D.H. Vo, Human Capital Efficiency and Firm Performance across Sectors in an Emerging Market, Cogent Bus. Manag. 7 (2020), 1738832. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2020.1738832.
  32. M.N. Butt, A.S. Baig, F.J. Seyyed, Tobin’s Q Approximation as a Metric of Firm Performance: An Empirical Evaluation, J. Strat. Mark. 31 (2023), 532–548. https://doi.org/10.1080/0965254X.2021.1947875.
  33. M. Steen, J.T. Moussawi, O. Gjolberg, Is There a Relationship between Morningstar’s ESG Ratings and Mutual Fund Performance?, J. Sustain. Finance Invest. 10 (2020), 349–370. https://doi.org/10.1080/20430795.2019.1700065.
  34. C. Walkshäusl, Dissecting the Performance of Socially Responsible Firms, J. Invest. 27 (2018), 29–40. https://doi.org/10.3905/joi.2018.27.2.029.
  35. P. Fahad, S.A. Busru, CSR Disclosure and Firm Performance: Evidence from an Emerging Market, Corp. Gov. Int. J. Bus. Soc. 21 (2021), 553–568. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-05-2020-0201.
  36. A. Prasetyantoko, R. Parmono, Does Firm Size Matter? an empirical Study of Firm Performance in Indonesia, J. Manaj. Bisnis, 2 (2009), 87–97.
  37. D.H. Haneberg, How Combinations of Network Participation, Firm Age and Firm Size Explain SMEs’ Responses to COVID-19, Small Entrep. Res. 28 (2021), 229–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/13215906.2021.1989626.
  38. O. Dvouletý, S. Srhoj, S. Pantea, Public SME Grants and Firm Performance in European Union: A Systematic Review of Empirical Evidence, Small Bus. Econ. 57 (2021), 243–263. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-019-00306-x.
  39. I. Adelopo, N. Vichou, K.Y. Cheung, Capital, Liquidity, and Profitability in European Banks, J. Corp. Account. Finance 33 (2022), 23–35. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcaf.22522.
  40. W. Hadid, M. Hamdan, Firm Size and Cost System Sophistication: The Role of Firm Age, Br. Account. Rev. 54 (2022), 101037. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2021.101037.
  41. S.K. Medase, Product Innovation and Employees’ Slack Time. The Moderating Role of Firm Age & Size, J. Innov. Knowl. 5 (2020), 151–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2019.11.001.
  42. O. Osiyevskyy, G. Shirokova, P. Ritala, Exploration and Exploitation in Crisis Environment: Implications for Level and Variability of Firm Performance, J. Bus. Res. 114 (2020), 227–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.04.015.
  43. P. Kalantonis, C. Kallandranis, M. Sotiropoulos, Leverage and Firm Performance: New Evidence on the Role of Economic Sentiment Using Accounting Information, J. Cap. Mark. Stud. 5 (2021), 96–107. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCMS-10-2020-0042.
  44. Z. ul ISLAM, M.M. IQBAL, The Relationship Between Capital Structure and Firm Performance: New Evidence from Pakistan, The Journal of Asian Finance, Econ. Bus. 9 (2022), 81–92. https://doi.org/10.13106/JAFEB.2022.VOL9.NO2.0081.
  45. B.T.T. Dao, T.D.N. Ta, A Meta-Analysis: Capital Structure and Firm Performance, J. Econ. Dev. 22 (2020), 111–129. https://doi.org/10.1108/JED-12-2019-0072.
  46. A. Shah Mohd, D. Ahmed Siddiqui, Effect of Macroeconomic Factors on Firms ROA: A Comparative Sectorial Analysis from Pakistan, Int. J. Publ. Soc. Stud. 5 (2020), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.18488/journal.135.2020.51.1.17.
  47. J. Xu, J. Li, The Interrelationship between Intellectual Capital and Firm Performance: Evidence from China’s Manufacturing Sector, J. Intellect. Cap. 23 (2022), 313–341. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-08-2019-0189.
  48. A.O. Dada, Z.B. Ghazali, Corporate Governance Mechanisms: The Determinants of Listed Firm Performance in Nigeria, Res. J. Finance Account. 7 (2016), 68–84.
  49. C. Nguyen, Macroeconomic Factors and Firm Performance – The Case in the Stock, Sci. Technol. Dev. J. Econ. Law Manag. 7 (2023), 4000-4007. https://doi.org/10.32508/stdjelm.v7i1.1123.
  50. K. Pacini, P. Mayer, S. Attar, J. Azam, Macroeconomic Factors and Firm Performance in the United Kingdom, J. Smart Econ. Growth, 2 (2017), 1–11.
  51. C. Cheong, H.V. Hoang, Macroeconomic Factors or Firm-Specific Factors? An Examination of the Impact on Corporate Profitability before, during and after the Global Financial Crisis, Cogent Econ. Finance 9 (2021), 1959703. https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2021.1959703.
  52. E. Mavroudi, E. Kesidou, K. Pandza, Effects of Ambidextrous and Specialized R&D Strategies on Firm Performance: The Contingent Role of Industry Orientation, J. Bus. Res. 154 (2023), 113353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.113353.
  53. X. Jia, Corporate Social Responsibility Activities and Firm Performance: The Moderating Role of Strategic Emphasis and Industry Competition, Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 27 (2020), 65–73. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1774.
  54. X. Huang, The Roles of Competition on Innovation Efficiency and Firm Performance: Evidence from the Chinese Manufacturing Industry, Eur. Res. Manag. Bus. Econ. 29 (2023), 100201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iedeen.2022.100201.
  55. C.C. Yan, Y.Z. Hui, L. Xin, The Relationship between Board Size and Firm Performance, E3S Web Conf. 257 (2021), 02079. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202125702079.
  56. R. Fariha, Md.M. Hossain, R. Ghosh, Board Characteristics, Audit Committee Attributes and Firm Performance: Empirical Evidence from Emerging Economy, Asian J. Account. Res. 7 (2022), 84–96. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJAR-11-2020-0115.
  57. N. Ahmad, F.N. Shah, F. Ijaz, M.N. Ghouri, Corporate Income Tax, Asset Turnover and Tobin’s Q as Firm Performance in Pakistan: Moderating Role of Liquidity Ratio, Cogent Bus. Manag. 10 (2023), 2167287. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2167287.
  58. D.M. Hussey, P.L. Kirsop, R.E. Meissen, Global Reporting Initiative Guidelines: An Evaluation of Sustainable Development Metrics for Industry, Environ. Qual. Manag. 11 (2001), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1002/tqem.1200.
  59. S. Pizzi, F. Rosati, A. Venturelli, The Determinants of Business Contribution to the 2030 Agenda: Introducing the SDG Reporting Score, Bus. Strat. Environ. 30 (2021), 404–421. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2628.
  60. O.A. Erin, O.A. Bamigboye, B. Oyewo, Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) Reporting: An Analysis of Disclosure, J. Account. Emerg. Econ. 12 (2022), 761–789. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAEE-02-2020-0037.
  61. H.N. Dang, C.D. Pham, The Effects of Earning Quality on Sustainable Reports: An Empirical Study from Vietnam, Econ. Res.-Ekon. Istraživ. 35 (2022), 6705–6722. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2022.2053360.
  62. M.M. Mariani, K. Al-Sultan, A. De Massis, Corporate Social Responsibility in Family Firms: A Systematic Literature Review, J. Small Bus. Manag. 61 (2023), 1192–1246. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2021.1955122.
  63. E. Mavroudi, E. Kesidou, K. Pandza, Effects of Ambidextrous and Specialized R&D Strategies on Firm Performance: The Contingent Role of Industry Orientation, J. Bus. Res. 154 (2023), 113353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.113353.
  64. R. Almeyda, A. Darmansya, The Influence of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Disclosure on Firm Financial Performance, IPTEK J. Proc. Ser. 5 (2019), 278-290. https://doi.org/10.12962/j23546026.y2019i5.6340.
  65. C.-H. Chen, The Mediating Effect of Corporate Culture on the Relationship between Business Model Innovation and Corporate Social Responsibility: A Perspective from Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises, Asia Pac. Manag. Rev. 27 (2022), 312–319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmrv.2022.01.001.
  66. A. Waheed, Q. Zhang, Effect of CSR and Ethical Practices on Sustainable Competitive Performance: A Case of Emerging Markets from Stakeholder Theory Perspective, J. Bus. Ethics 175 (2022), 837–855. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04679-y.