ESG And Firm Value in Vietnam: The Moderating Role of Profitability

Article Sidebar

PDF
DOI: https://doi.org/10.28924/2291-8639-23-2025-234
Published: Sep 19, 2025
Cite as:
Thi Lam Anh Nguyen, Thi Thu Trang La, ESG And Firm Value in Vietnam: The Moderating Role of Profitability, Int. J. Anal. Appl., 23 (2025), 234.

Main Article Content

Thi Lam Anh Nguyen, Thi Thu Trang La

Abstract

This study examines the relationship between environmental, social, and governance (ESG) practices and firm value in Vietnam, with a specific focus on the moderating role of profitability. Using a panel dataset of publicly listed Vietnamese companies between 2014 and 2023, the study applies the Feasible Generalized Least Squares (FGLS) method to address potential heteroscedasticity and autocorrelation issues. The findings indicate that ESG engagement has a generally positive impact on firm value, measured by Tobin’s Q.; however, this effect varies significantly across firms depending on their profitability levels. Firms with higher profitability benefit more from ESG practices, while those with low profitability experience weaker or neutral effects. This suggests that financial health plays a critical role in shaping the outcomes of ESG adoptions. This study contributes to the growing ESG literature in emerging markets by highlighting how internal financial capacity affects the effectiveness of sustainability strategies. It also provides practical implications for managers and policymakers seeking to align ESG initiatives with value-creation goals.

Article Details

References

  1. R.G. Eccles, I. Ioannou, G. Serafeim, The Impact of Corporate Sustainability on Organizational Processes and Performance, Manag. Sci. 60 (2014), 2835-2857. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2014.1984.
  2. M. Khan, G. Serafeim, A. Yoon, Corporate Sustainability: First Evidence on Materiality, Account. Rev. 91 (2016), 1697-1724. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr-51383.
  3. A. Fatemi, M. Glaum, S. Kaiser, Esg Performance and Firm Value: The Moderating Role of Disclosure, Glob. Financ. J. 38 (2018), 45-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfj.2017.03.001.
  4. P. Krüger, Corporate Goodness and Shareholder Wealth, J. Financ. Econ. 115 (2015), 304-329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2014.09.008.
  5. N. Mai Tran, M. Ha Tran, Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure and Firm Performance: Evidence from Vietnam, Invest. Manag. Financ. Innov. 19 (2022), 49-59. https://doi.org/10.21511/imfi.19(3).2022.05.
  6. R.E. Freeman, Strategic Management, Cambridge University Press, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139192675.
  7. J. Barney, Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage, J. Manag. 17 (1991), 99-120. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108.
  8. Z. Luo, Y. Li, L.T. Nguyen, I. Jo, J. Zhao, The Moderating Role of Country Governance in the Link Between Esg and Financial Performance: A Study of Listed Companies in 58 Countries, Sustainability 16 (2024), 5410. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16135410.
  9. T.T. Tawfiq, H. Tawaha, A. Tahtamouni, N.A. Almasria, The Influence of Environmental, Social, and Governance Disclosure on Capital Structure: An Investigation of Leverage and WACC, J. Risk Financ. Manag. 17 (2024), 570. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm17120570.
  10. H. Dkhili, Does Environmental, Social and Governance (esg) Affect Market Performance? the Moderating Role of Competitive Advantage, Compet. Rev.: Int. Bus. J. 34 (2023), 327-352. https://doi.org/10.1108/cr-10-2022-0149.
  11. M. Biasin, A. Delle Foglie, E. Giacomini, Addressing Climate Challenges Through ESG-Real Estate Investment Strategies: An Asset Allocation Perspective, Financ. Res. Lett. 63 (2024), 105381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2024.105381.
  12. C. De Lucia, P. Pazienza, M. Bartlett, Does Good ESG Lead to Better Financial Performances by Firms? Machine Learning and Logistic Regression Models of Public Enterprises in Europe, Sustainability 12 (2020), 5317. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12135317.
  13. N.H. Ab Aziz, A.R. Abdul Latiff, S.M. Alshdaifat, M.N.H. Osman, N.A. Azmi, ESG Disclosure and Firm Performance: Evidence After the Revision of Malaysian Code of Corporate Governance, Int. J. Acad. Res. Bus. Soc. Sci. 13 (2023), 2919-2938. https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarbss/v13-i12/19140.
  14. H. Servaes, A. Tamayo, The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Firm Value: The Role of Customer Awareness, Manag. Sci. 59 (2013), 1045-1061. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1120.1630.
  15. I. Ioannou, G. Serafeim, The Consequences of Mandatory Corporate Sustainability Reporting, Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 11 100 (2011, Revised 2012). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1799589.
  16. B. Thi Thu Loan, T. Thi Lan Anh, T. Hoang, Esg Disclosure and Financial Performance: Empirical Study of Vietnamese Commercial Banks, Banks Bank Syst. 19 (2024), 208-220. https://doi.org/10.21511/bbs.19(1).2024.18.
  17. S. Bilyay-Erdogan, B. Öztürkkal, The Role of Environmental, Social, Governance (ESG) Practices and Ownership on Firm Performance in Emerging Markets, Emerg. Mark. Financ. Trade 59 (2023), 3776-3797. https://doi.org/10.1080/1540496x.2023.2223930.
  18. G.G. Judge, W.E. Griffiths, R.C. Hill, H. Lütkepohl, T.C. Lee, The Theory and Practice of Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1991.
  19. 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.
  20. D. Yermack, Higher Market Valuation of Companies with a Small Board of Directors, J. Financ. Econ. 40 (1996), 185-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405x(95)00844-5.
  21. S.C. Myers, The Capital Structure Puzzle, J. Financ. 39 (1984), 575-592. https://doi.org/10.2307/2327916.
  22. M.Z. Frank, V.K. Goyal, Capital Structure Decisions: Which Factors Are Reliably Important?, Financ. Manag. 38 (2009), 1-37. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-053x.2009.01026.x.
  23. K.V. LINS, H. SERVAES, A. TAMAYO, Social Capital, Trust, and Firm Performance: The Value of Corporate Social Responsibility During the Financial Crisis, J. Financ. 72 (2017), 1785-1824. https://doi.org/10.1111/jofi.12505.
  24. Y. Chen, M. Hung, Y. Wang, The Effect of Mandatory CSR Disclosure on Firm Profitability and Social Externalities: Evidence from China, J. Account. Econ. 65 (2018), 169-190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2017.11.009.
  25. A. Goss, G.S. Roberts, The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on the Cost of Bank Loans, J. Bank. Financ. 35 (2011), 1794-1810. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2010.12.002.
  26. A. Lawrence, M. Minutti-Meza, P. Zhang, Can Big 4 Versus Non-Big 4 Differences in Audit-Quality Proxies Be Attributed to Client Characteristics?, Account. Rev. 86 (2011), 259-286. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.00000009.
  27. D.C. Broadstock, K. Chan, L.T. Cheng, X. Wang, The Role of ESG Performance During Times of Financial Crisis: Evidence from COVID-19 in China, Financ. Res. Lett. 38 (2021), 101716. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2020.101716.