As sustainability reporting has emerged as one of the most critical issues in the business world, this research aims to investigate the relationship between sustainability reporting and firm value based on listed companies in Singapore. We use an established sustainability reporting assessment framework and test how both the adoption and quality of sustainability reporting are related to a firm’s market value. Empirical results suggest that sustainability reporting is positively related to firm’s market value and this relationship is independent of sector or firm status such as government-linked companies and family businesses.

This paper aims to investigate the relationship between board governance and sustainability disclosure in Singapore. Regression analysis is performed using cross-sectional data of Singapore-listed companies to examine the relationship between sustainability disclosure and various board governance factors, including board capacity, board independence, and board incentive. The findings show the presence of significant associations between board governance and sustainability disclosure. In terms of board capacity, companies with larger board sizes and a higher number of board meetings are more likely to practice sustainability reporting, and their reporting qualities are higher. For board independence, the percentage of independent directors positively impacts the firm’s reporting probability and quality on sustainability in Singapore. For board incentives, the practice of long-term incentives for executive directors can significantly improve both the probability and quality of sustainability reporting. The study adds to the literature on corporate governance and sustainability disclosure. It provides empirical evidence and guidance for firms and policy-makers in Singapore and beyond on how sustainability disclosure can be improved through robust board governance.

Corporate sustainability has been a long-established topic in the corporate operating process. Much research focuses on the internal relationships among environmental, social and economic dimensions of corporate sustainability, yet few studies have examined the topic from the perspective of environmental, social and governance (ESG) initiatives and innovative performance. Using insights from stakeholder theory, this study develops theoretical linkages between corporate ESG initiatives and innovative performance. It further considers whether these relationships still exist under different institutional development settings. Based on the samples of 433 observations which are listed on the Shanghai and Shenzhen stock exchanges, in China, from 2007 to 2017, empirical results using the method of hierarchical regression analysis have confirmed that corporate environmental initiatives, social initiatives and governance initiatives have direct positive impacts on innovative performance. Furthermore, in examining the interactive effect of individual dimensions of ESG initiatives, the results reveal that corporate governance initiatives play a moderating role in the relationship between environmental initiatives and innovative performance and in the relationship between social initiatives and innovative performance. Finally, the empirical analyses also show that institutional development influences the effectiveness of corporate governance initiatives. This research contributes to extending the prior literature and providing several recommendations for firms to achieve corporate sustainability.

The recent sustainability reporting (SR) mandate by the Singapore Exchange has heightened stakeholder awareness and propelled sustainability disclosures. Albeit encouraging, more than half of listed companies in Singapore do not produce sustainability reports. This signifies a lack of sustainability commitment, or perhaps, local companies have limited understanding on the potential value of sustainability. Our study aims to fill this gap by examining if (1) the 100 leading brands in Singapore similarly benefit from a higher brand value when they produce sustainability reports; (2) if more disclosure leads to higher brand value; (3) if a lagged effect is present. The methodology of this study included the collation of sustainability information from the 100 leading brands in Singapore, scoring each company’s sustainability performance using the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) framework. Finally, we examine the correlations using regression analysis to compare the companies’ sustainability performance with the reputed brand rankings by Brand Finance. Our findings revealed that one-fifth of the 100 leading brands in Singapore do not engage in sustainability, despite the positive correlation between sustainability reporting and brand value. Our results also suggest that greater disclosure leads to higher brand value, yet social and environmental indicators are undermanaged. Moreover, there is a lagged effect as public perceptions take time to shape. Internalising a company’s sustainability vision through a multi-stakeholder consultative approach is critical. Brand managers and sustainability practitioners must be aware that failures to meet stakeholder expectations today may consequently impact investors’ decisions.

As China is undergoing economic transformation and facing increasing energy and environmental problems, it is essential to pay special attention to sustainable innovation governance. This research took industrial waste and total energy consumption into consideration and uses a super efficiency slack-based measure (SBM) model to empirically evaluate the regional innovation efficiency of Chinese provinces. The results showed that the efficiency of China’s regional sustainable innovation has not changed significantly over recent years. In addition, the results also showed large and varying degrees of innovation efficiency across different provinces. Eastern China, in comparison to central and western China, showed higher innovation efficiency. In addition, we found a slightly increasing trend in terms of innovation efficiency disparities between the three areas. On the basis of these findings, the reasons for the innovation efficiency gap between different regions were analyzed. The impacts of influential factors on sustainable innovation efficiency were further explored. We found that technology market maturity affected sustainable innovation efficiency positively, while government funding had a negative impact on sustainable innovation efficiency. Industrial structure and environmental regulations had no significant effect on sustainable innovation efficiency. Finally, some implications for improving governance performance in terms of sustainable innovation were provided.

Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) integration is an increasingly popular and innovative investing strategy that requires companies to be transparent about their ESG practices to facilitate investors’ decisions. In the palm oil sector, companies are addressing ESG risks by adopting and disclosing ESG efforts to improve access to financing. This study seeks to broaden existing research on ESG transparency and firms’ financial indicators by using firm valuation as a financial indicator and investigating the moderating role of firm size in the palm oil sector. It first investigates whether ESG transparency has a direct positive or negative effect on firm valuation. Transparency is measured using the Zoological Society of London’s (ZSL) Sustainability Policy Transparency Toolkit (SPOTT) 2021 assessment, which provides scores for palm oil companies’ total, environmental, social, and governance disclosures. Firm valuation is measured by the price-to-earnings ratio (P/E), a widely used ratio calculated by dividing the share price by earnings per share. The study also explores the moderating role of firm size, using accounting-based measures such as revenue and assets, in strengthening the relationship between ESG transparency and firm valuation. The results show statistically significant negative relationships between ESG transparency and firm valuation. Companies with stronger ESG transparency are valued at a discount relative to companies with weaker ESG transparency. Additionally, the results find that firm size plays a moderating role such that larger firms strengthen the negative relationships between all transparency measures and firm valuation. These findings encourage constructive action for various stakeholders and provide implications for future research to support mainstreaming sustainable palm oil.