อิทธิพลของผลการประเมินความยั่งยืนต่อผลการดำเนินงานขององค์กรแบบหลายมิติของบริษัทที่จดทะเบียนในตลาดหลักทรัพย์แห่งประเทศไทย

Nantapatch Hirunratwathin; Netdao Chaiyakhet; Warawit Phetruen

Authors

Nantapatch Hirunratwathin Master of Accountancy Program, Burapha Business School, Burapha University
Netdao Chaiyakhet Master of Accountancy Program, Burapha Business School, Burapha University
Warawit Phetruen Master of Accountancy Program, Burapha Business School, Burapha University

Keywords:

ESG rating status, MD&A Sentiment Score, return on equity, firm value, economic value added

Abstract

This study aims to examine how sustainability assessment results (ESG Rating) and the environmental, social, and governance textual tone in Management Discussion and Analysis reports (MD&A Sentiment Score) influence return on equity, firm value as measured by Tobin’s Q, and economic value added for companies listed on the Stock Exchange of Thailand. This quantitative research employed secondary data from companies listed on the Stock Exchange of Thailand during 2020–2024, comprising 1,795 firm-year observations. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, Pearson’s correlation coefficient, and multiple regression analysis. The findings reveal the ESG rating has a statistically significant positive influence on return on equity and Tobin’s Q, but a statistically significant negative influence on economic value added. Regarding the MD&A sentiment scores, environmental sentiment showed a statistically significant negative influence on all three performance indicators. Social sentiment has a statistically significant positive influence on return on equity, but no significant influence on Tobin’s Q or economic value added. Governance sentiment shows a positive tendency toward Tobin’s Q at the 0.10 significance level. These findings indicate that ESG rating and MD&A sentiment score can serve as useful information for analyzing corporate financial performance and firm value, while highlighting the potential application of natural language processing and artificial intelligence to narrative financial disclosures.

References

ศศิกานต์ ลัทธิธรรม. (2567). ผลกระทบของ ESG ต่อผลการดำเนินงานทางการเงินในระยะยาวของกิจการ: กรณีศึกษาบริษัทจดทะเบียนในตลาดหลักทรัพย์แห่งประเทศไทย (SET). การค้นคว้าอิสระวิทยาศาสตรมหาบัณฑิต สาขาวิชาการบัญชีและการบริหารการเงิน มหาวิทยาลัยธรรมศาสตร์.

Aydoğmuş, M., Gülay, G., & Ergun, K. (2022). Impact of ESG performance on firm value and profitability. Borsa Istanbul Review, 22(Suppl. 2), S119–S127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bir.2022.11.006.

Chang, K. (2015). The effect of environmental performance and preference disclosure on financial performance: Empirical evidence from unbalanced panel data of heavy-pollution industries in China. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, 8(1), 21–36. https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.1240.

Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman.

Gonçalves, T. C., Barros, V., & Avelar, J. V. (2023a). Environmental, social and governance scores in Europe: What drives financial performance for larger firms? Economics and Business Letters, 12(2), 121–131. https://doi.org/10.17811/ebl.12.2.2023.121-131.

Gonçalves, T. C., Louro, D., & Barros, V. (2023b). Can corporate sustainability drive economic value added? Evidence from larger European firms. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 16(4), Article 215. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm16040215.

Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996). The balanced scorecard: Translating strategy into action. Harvard Business School Press.

Li, F. (2010). The information content of forward-looking statements in corporate filings: A naïve Bayesian machine learning approach. Journal of Accounting Research, 48(5), 1049–1102. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-679X.2010.00382.x.

Luo, Y., & Zhou, L. (2020). Textual tone in corporate financial disclosures: A survey of the literature. International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, 17, 101–110. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41310-020-00077-y.

Prabawati, P. I., & Rahmawati, I. P. (2022). The effects of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) scores on firm values in ASEAN member countries. Jurnal Akuntansi dan Auditing Indonesia, 26(2), 119–129. https://doi.org/10.20885/jaai.vol26.iss2.art2.

Sahu, A. K., Debata, B., & Dash, S. R. (2024). Manager sentiment, policy uncertainty, ESG disclosure and firm performance: A large language model in corporate landscape. International Journal of Accounting & Information Management, 32(5), 858–882. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJAIM-08-2023-0206.

Sirathavornvong, K., Sukcharoensin, P., & Tiyarattanachai, R. (2024). The relationship between ESG and financial performance of the companies listed in SET50. Development Economic Review, 18(2), 75–93 https://so06.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/NER/article/view/274953.

Spence, M. (1973). Job market signaling. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 87(3), 355–374. https://doi.org/10.2307/1882010.

Stewart, G. B., III. (1991). The quest for value: A guide for senior managers. HarperBusiness.

Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (1997). The corporate social performance–financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18(4), 303–319. https://econpapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:stratm:v:18:y:1997:i:4:p:303-319.

Whelan, T., Atz, U., Van Holt, T., & Clark, C. (2021). ESG and financial performance: Uncovering the relationship by aggregating evidence from 1,000 plus studies published between 2015–2020. NYU Stern Center for Sustainable Business & Rockefeller Asset Management. https://www.stern.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/assets/documents/NYU-RAM_ESG-Paper_2021%20Rev_0.pdf.

Yan, H. (2024). Environmental information disclosure, earnings quality and the readability and emotional tendencies of management discussion and analysis. Finance Research Letters, 60, Article 104913. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2023.104913.

Yoon, B., Lee, J. H., & Cho, J. H. (2024). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: New evidence from the Korean market. SAGE Open, 14(2), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440241255196.