Search results

This study aims to investigate the association between board diversity and systematic risk. The theoretical framework used in this study is based on agency and resource dependency theories.

Using a panel data set of 788 firms listed in the Morgan Stanley Capital International (MSCI) Emerging Markets index from 2015 to 2020, the authors apply Panel-Corrected Standard Error estimation method to test the three proposed hypotheses and the two-stage least squares method is adopted for the endogenous test.

The results suggest that board-specific skills diversity (BSSD) and board independence (BIND) have a negative impact on systematic risk. On the other hand, board gender diversity does not affect systematic risk. The findings reinforce the relevance of board diversity for reducing systematic risk and offer valuable insights for policymakers and investors, suggesting that the presence of directors with specific skills and independent directors could reduce firms’ systematic risk.

The study extends the scope of agency and resource dependency theories by suggesting that the BSSD and BIND reduce agency costs and bring critical resources to the firm’s survival.

The findings support policymakers and managers in reducing systematic risk. In addition, the results demonstrate the importance of policies that encourage board diversity and BIND.

The study demonstrates how companies can reduce systematic risk through board diversity and BIND.

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to investigate the association between board diversity and systematic risk only in emerging markets.

This study aims to investigate the association between the presence of a corporate social responsibility (CSR) committee and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) disclosure, as well as the moderating role of gender diversity in this relation.

The sample consists of 897 annual observations from 238 firms from Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico and Peru for 2018–2020. The data were collected from the Refinitiv database. The proposed model and hypotheses were tested using the feasible generalized least squares estimation technique with heteroscedasticity and panel-specific AR1 autocorrelation.

The results reveal that the presence of CSR committees positively influences the SDGs. Gender diversity positively moderates the relationship between CSR committees and SDGs. Leverage and firm size also positively impact the SDGs. On the other hand, board size and CEO duality negatively affect SDGs disclosure.

This study extends the scope of stakeholder theory by suggesting that CSR committees and gender diversity enable a better relationship for the firm with its stakeholders.

The findings support policymakers and managers in improving sustainability disclosure. In addition, the results demonstrate the importance of CSR committees and gender diversity to meet the stakeholders' demands.

This study demonstrates how firms can improve sustainability issues through gender diversity and CSR committees.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study complements previous literature by being the first to examine the moderating effect of gender diversity on the association between CSR committees and SDGs disclosure in the Latin American context.

This paper aims to explore the relationship between board composition and a firm’s commitment to combatting climate change. Specifically, this study investigates how various characteristics of the board, namely its size and presence of independent directors, and of the directors themselves, including gender diversity, age, educational background and national homogeneity, affect the corporate-level climate change orientation. From a theoretical standpoint, the authors take a cross-fertilizing perspective, bridging upper echelons theory with agency, resource dependence and critical mass theories.

The study uses ordered probit regression models on a hand-collected multi-country and multi-industry sample of 35 listed firms included in the Global Climate Change Liquid Equity Index (GALPLACC) provided by ECPI. This index is particularly relevant as it focuses on firms that have demonstrated a commitment to climate change, providing a robust dataset for the analysis.

The findings underscore the importance of disentangling various characteristics of corporate boards and directors. Specifically, the orientation toward climate change is negatively influenced by both board size and having a higher number of independent directors, while it is positively affected by reaching a critical mass of women on the board. Conversely, factors such as average age, educational background and the level of national homogeneity do not show significant effects.

This paper has an exploratory nature and contributes to the ongoing debate on the crucial, yet controversial role played by board-level and directors’ sociodemographic characteristics in shaping a firm’s environmental stance. Moreover, this study offers potential recommendations for policymakers regarding board composition to enhance firms’ climate change orientation.