Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/145856
|
| Title: | 採SASB準則下ESG重大性議題與賣方分析師預測之探討
A Study of Material ESG SASB Factors and Sell-side Analysts` Estimations |
| Authors: | 王宜婕
Wang, Yi-Jie |
| Contributors: | 楊曉文
王宜婕
Wang, Yi-Jie |
| Keywords: | SASB
ESG
重大性議題
目標價
SASB
ESG
Materiality issue
Target price |
| Date: | 2023 |
| Issue Date: | 2023-07-06 16:46:05 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 由於SASB 準則主要關注財務相關資訊，著重於協助企業分析重大ESG議題如何影響其財務表現，對於投資人之重要性亦與日俱增，然而過去多數文獻以探討ESG分數對股價或目標價影響為主，採用SASB準則為分析重點的研究尚不全面，故本研究以2008-2020年的S&P500成分公司為研究樣本，將Bloomberg的ESG資料庫映射至各產業重大性議題以計算其SASB分數，探討企業揭露具有重大性之ESG議題且表現較佳時，是否有助於收斂賣方分析師给予其股票目標價之區間，使投資人獲得較為一致的資訊，另外研究SASB分數較佳的企業，賣方分析師是否將给予其較高的目標價。
實證結果顯示，當企業的SASB分數較佳時，對於賣方分析師的目標價區間有顯著影響，且為顯著收斂，亦即目標價區間得以縮小，代表企業揭露其SASB重大性議題，有助於分析師解讀企業永續作為對財務績效或市場評價的影響，從而使個別分析師對於永續面向之看法得趨於一致，當企業的重大性議題表現越佳時，分析師給予其股票之潛在漲幅會縮減，另外，在SASB完整準則發布後，SASB分數對於目標價區間的收斂效果優於準則發布前，顯示完整準則發布有利於分析師進行評估。總結而言，企業重大性議題表現可给予分析師更多資訊進行估值，使目標價區間大小與SASB表現呈現負向關係。
SASB Standards have become increasingly important to investors because the standards mainly concern with financial related information and focus on assisting companies to analyze how materiality ESG issues affect financial performance. However, most of the past literatures focus on the impact of ESG scores on stock prices or targe prices, and the studies using SASB standards are not yet comprehensive. The study takes a sample of S&P 500 companies from 2008-2020, and maps Bloomberg`s ESG data to industries` materiality issues to calculate the companies` SASB scores. The research explores whether the companies disclose materiality issues helps to converge sell-side analysts` target price range so that investors would receive more consistent information. In addition, the study examines whether sell-side analysts will value higher target prices to companies with better SASB scores.
The empirical results show that when a company has a better SASB score, it has a significant impact on the seller analyst`s target price range. This means that the disclosure of a company`s SASB materiality issue helps analysts interpret the impact of sustainability on financial performance or valuation, which in turn leads to consistency in individual analysts` views on sustainability. In addition, after the release of the complete SASB Standard, the target price range converges more significant than before the release of the Standard, indicating that the release of the complete SASB Standard is beneficial to analysts` assessments. To sum up, the performance of corporate ESG materiality issues provides analysts with more information for valuation, resulting in a negative relationship between the target price range and SASB performance. |
| Reference: | 一、 英文文獻
1. Balatbat, M. c. a., Siew, R. Y. j., & Carmichael , D. g. (2012). ESG Scores and Its Influence on Firm Performance: Australian Evidence. Australian School of Business School of Accounting.
2. Berry , T., & Junkus, J. (2013). Socially Responsible Investing: An Investor Perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 112(4), 707–720.
3. Bolognesi, E., & Burchi, A. (2023). The Impact of the ESG Disclosure on Sell-Side Analysts’ Target Prices: The New Era Post Paris Agreements. Research in International Business and Finance, 64.
4. Brav, A., & Lehavy, R. (2003). An Empirical Analysis of Analysts’ Target Prices: Short-Term Informativeness and Long-Term Dynamics. The Journal of Finance, 58(5), 1933–1967.
5. Chang, H. (2022). The Impact of SASB-Based Material ESG Issues on the Cost of Equity.
6. Chen, Z., & Xie, G. (2022). ESG Disclosure and Financial Performance: Moderating Role of ESG Investors. International Review of Financial Analysis, 83.
7. Cheng, B., Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2014). Corporate social responsibility and access to finance. Strategic Management Journal, 35(1), 1-23.
8. Consolandi, C., Eccles, R. g., & Gabbi, G. (2022). How Material Is a Material Issue? Stock Returns and the Financial Relevance and Financial Intensity of ESG Materiality. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 12(4).
9. Drempetic, S., Klein, C., & Zwergel, B. (2020). The Influence of Firm Size on the ESG Score: Corporate Sustainability Ratings Under Review. Journal of Business Ethics, 167, 333–360.
10. Duuren, E. V., Plantinga, A., & Scholtens, B. (2016). ESG Integration and the Investment Management Process: Fundamental Investing Reinvented. Journal of Business Ethics, 138, 525–533.
11. Eng, L. li, Fikru, M., & Vichitsarawong, T. (2022). Comparing the Informativeness of Sustainability Disclosures versus ESG Disclosure Ratings. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 13(2), 494–518.
12. Friede, G., Busch, T., & Bassen, A. (2015). ESG and Financial Performance: Aggregated Evidence from More than 2000 Empirical Studies. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 5(4), 210–233.
13. Gavana, G., Gottardo, P., & Moisello, A. M. (2017). The Effect of Equity and Bond Issues on Sustainability Disclosure. Family vs Non-Family Italian Firms. Social Responsibility Journal, 13(1), 126–142.
14. Ghoul, S. E., Guedhami, O., Kwok, C. C. y., & Mishra, D. R. (2011). Does Corporate Social Responsibility Affect the Cost of Capital? Journal of Banking & Finance, 35(9), 2388–2406.
15. Grewal, J., Hauptmann, C., & Serafeim, G. (2017). Stock Price Synchronicity and Material Sustainability Information. HBS Scholarly Articles.
16. Griffin, J., & Mahon, J. F. (1997). The Corporate Social Performance and Corporate Financial Performance Debate: Twenty-Five Years of Incomparable Research. Business & Society, 35(5), 5–31.
17. Henriksson, R., Livnat, J., Pfeifer, P., & Stumpp, M. (2019). Integrating ESG in Portfolio Construction. The Journal of Portfolio Management, 45(4).
18. Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2015). The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Investment Recommendations: Analysts’ Perceptions and Shifting Institutional Logics. Strategic Management Journal, 36(7), 1053–1081.
19. Khan, M., Serafeim, G., & Yoon, A. (2015). Corporate Sustainability: First Evidence on Materiality. The Accounting Review, 91(6), 1697–1724.
20. Madison, N., & schiehll, E. (2021). The Effect of Financial Materiality on ESG Performance Assessment. Sustainability, 13(7).
21. Nirino, N., Santoro, G., Miglietta, N., & Quaglia, R. (2021). Corporate Controversies and Company’s Financial Performance: Exploring the Moderating Role of ESG Practices. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 162.
22. Park, M., Yoon, A., & Zach, T. (2022). Sell-Side Analysts’ Assessment of ESG Risk.
23. Pizzi, S., Principale, S., & Nuccio, E. D. (2022). Material Sustainability Information and Reporting Standards. Exploring the Differences between GRI and SASB. Meditari Accountancy Research.
24. PwC Asset and wealth management revolution: The power to shape the future. (2020), from
https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/industries/financial-services/assets/wealth-management-2-0-data-tool/pwc_awm_revolution_2020.pdf
25. Revelli, C., & Viviani, J. (2015). Financial Performance of Socially Responsible Investing (SRI): What Have We Learned? A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 24(2), 158–185.
26. Spandel, T., Schiemann, F., & Hoepner, A. G. f. (2020). Capital Market Reactions to ESG Materiality Classifications.
27. Umar, M., Mirza, N., Rizvi, S. K. abbas, & Naqvi, B. (2022). ESG Scores and Target Price Accuracy: Evidence from Sell-Side Recommendations in BRICS. International Review of Financial Analysis, 84.
28. Sassen, R., Hinze, A., & Hardeck, I. (2016). Impact of ESG Factors on Firm Risk in Europe. Journal of Business Economics, 86, 867–904.
29. Van der Lugt, C., van de Wijs, P. P., & Petrovics, D. (2020). Carrots & Sticks: Sustainability Reporting Policy: Global trends in disclosure as the ESG agenda goes mainstream. Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) and the University of Stellenbosch Business School (USB).
30. Velte, P. (2017). Does ESG Performance Have an Impact on Financial Performance? Evidence from Germany. Journal of Global Responsibility, 80(2), 169–178.
31. Yu, P. (2022). An Analysis of SASB ESG Materiality and Firm Risks.
二、 中文文獻
1. 黃浩瑜 (2022)。採SASB準則下ESG重大性議題與機構投資人之探討。
2. 施凱珍 (2021)。採SASB準則下ESG重大性議題與財務績效之探討。 |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
金融學系
110352007 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0110352007 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [金融學系] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Description |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 200701.pdf | | 1519Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 0 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
