Search results

This paper aims to investigate how organization capital influences different forms of corporate risk. It also explores how the relationship between organization capital and risks varies in the cross-section of firms.

To test the hypothesis, this study employs the ordinary least squares (OLS) regression model using a large sample of the United States (US) data over the 1981–2019 period. It also uses an instrumental variable approach and an errors-in-variables panel regression approach to mitigate endogeneity problems.

The empirical results show that organization capital is positively related to both idiosyncratic risk and total risk but negatively related to systematic risk. The cross-sectional analysis shows that the positive relationship between organization capital and idiosyncratic risk is significantly more pronounced for the subsample of firms with high information asymmetry and human capital. Moreover, the negative relationship between organization capital and systematic risk is significantly more pronounced for firms with greater efficiency and firms facing higher industry- and economy-wide risks.

The findings have important implications for investors and policymakers. For example, since organization capital increases idiosyncratic risk and total risk but reduces systematic risk, investors should take organization capital into account in portfolio formation and risk management. Moreover, the findings lend support to the argument on the recognition of intangible assets in financial statements. In particular, the study suggests that standard-setting bodies should consider corporate reporting frameworks to incorporate the disclosure of intangible assets into financial statements, particularly given the recent surge of corporate intangible assets and their critical impact on corporate risks.

To the best of the authors' knowledge, this is the first study to adopt a large sample to provide systematic evidence on the relationship between organization capital and a wide range of risks at the firm level. The authors show that the effect of organization capital on firm risks differs remarkably depending on the kind of firm risk a particular risk measure captures. This study thus makes an original contribution to resolving competing views on the effect of organization capital on firm risks.

This study examines the impact of firm-level climate risk exposure (FCRE) on firm stock liquidity by using a sample of Indian-listed firms from the financial years 2003–2004 to 2022–2023. Further, it endeavors to investigate the moderating role of environmental, social and governance (ESG) disclosure in this relationship.

A novel text-based FCRE metric is introduced using a sophisticated Word2Vec model through a Python-generated algorithm for each firm and year based on the management discussions and analysis (MD&A) reports. The panel fixed effect model is used to study how FCRE affects stock liquidity.

The result shows that FCRE negatively affects firms’ stock liquidity, and the effect remains robust after addressing endogeneity concerns. In addition, we find that a high ESG disclosure rating significantly moderated the adverse effect of FCRE. Furthermore, our analysis reveals that investor sentiment, information quality, corporate life cycle and institutional holdings moderate the impact of FCRE on liquidity.

The study offers valuable insights for investors, managers and policymakers on integrating climate risk into investment strategies, improving corporate climate governance and shaping policies that incentivize sustainable corporate behavior.

To the best of our knowledge, this study is an early study to explore the relationship between firm-specific climate risk exposure and stock liquidity using advanced machine learning techniques. It contributes to the existing literature by illustrating how climate risk can lead to adverse market reactions while highlighting the critical roles of corporate ESG practices, investor sentiment and disclosure quality in influencing this relationship.

The purpose of this paper is to make the case for bringing compassion to students in educational settings, preschool through graduate school (PK-20).

First, the author defines what is meant by “compassion” and differentiates it from the related constructs. Next, the author discusses the importance of bringing compassion into education, thinking specifically about preschool, K-12 (elementary and middle school/junior high/high school), college students, and graduate students (e.g. law, medical, nurses, counselors and therapists-in-training). The author then reviews the scant empirical literature on compassion in education and makes recommendations for future research. In the final section, the author makes specific and practical recommendations for the classroom (e.g. how to teach and evaluate compassion in PK-20).

While there is a fair amount of research on compassion with college students, and specifically regarding compassion for oneself, as the author reviews in this paper, the field is wide open in terms of empirical research with other students and examining other forms of compassion.

This is not a formal review or meta-analysis.

This paper will be a useful resource for teachers and those interested in PK-20 education.

This paper highlights the problems and opportunities for bringing compassion into education settings.

To date, no review of compassion in PK-20 exists.