With enhanced global scrutiny in the backdrop of climate change, we attempt to identify the importance of the ESG framework during Covid-19 pandemic to produce guidelines for future sustainability practices. A comprehensive review of literature on ESG regulatory frameworks for sample developed and developing country was performed leading to undertaking of a cross-country comparative ESG analysis. It was revealed that a country's social and governance disclosure were driven by either voluntary or by mandatory codes that could not be a standalone factor for uplifting the country's overall ESG level. Other governance measures like sustainability reporting and integrated reporting practices need to be considered in order to uplift the ESG practice. Country-level environmental commitment was vital for both developed and emerging markets for solving information asymmetry issues and establishment of resilient business operations and reporting practices, leading to an emerging sustainable practice which needs to be adopted. Our findings offer valuable insights for regulators, institutional investors and policymakers in terms of considering ESG practices adopted by developed countries and bridging the gap from unsustainability to sustainability in countries with least developed emerging ESG countries. The study encourages the regulators to devise disclosure policies as per the Triple ‘C’ framework namely policies that are convenient, credible and comparable with the flexibility to encompass black swan events like Covid-19. The purpose of such disclosures should be to resolve the information asymmetry problem which primarily exists when regulations are non-mandatory.

Environmental, social and governance (ESG) criteria mean investment in economic choices which, without interference with the environment, are intended to promote long-term economic and social well-being. Due to high environmental and social awareness, customers expect companies to devote time and efforts to such sustainable practices. This attitude has led to an overall rise in ESG disclosures and reporting instruments globally with a focus on influence of ESG disclosures on financial performance of companies. Many European countries have already introduced mandatory disclosure of non-financial information. This transition from voluntary to mandatory motivated other countries to adopt mandatory ESG disclosure practices for sustainable development. The practice of reporting non-financial disclosures has been rising due to several reasons, such as increasing visibility, informing customers, avoiding the risk associated with firm performance and achieving sustainability. Countries in the early stages of ESG disclosure need to understand the benchmark practices used by countries with a well-developed ESG system. For preparing the ESG disclosure index and benchmarking based on disclosure score, this study considers a set of developed and developing countries with their ESG disclosures. On the basis of ESG disclosures, the countries have been classified into four different categories. We found Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, United Kingdom, Belgium and France, to have high ESG scores and have been classified as Countries with Well-Developed ESG Framework. Germany, Italy, USA, Australia, Switzerland, Canada, Japan, Brazil and South Africa have medium to high ESG scores and fall under the category Rapidly improving ESG framework. While Singapore, India, China, Philippines, Malaysia and Argentina are categorized as countries with ESG framework at developing stage, Russia, Indonesia, Thailand, Nigeria and Vietnam are classified as Countries with early-stage framework due to low ESG scores.

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to compare environmental, social and governance (ESG) disclosures regulatory frameworks in developed and developing countries, identifying similarities, differences and trends to contribute to effective and sustainable practices globally.Design/methodology/approach: Descriptive research design compares ESG frameworks in developed and developing countries. It reviews literature, collects data, analyzes differences and categorizes countries based on ESG development stages. Implications, recommendations and an analytical ESG table are explored and validated.Findings: The study's findings have significant implications for practice, society and research. The categorization of 28 countries into four ESG framework development stages facilitates strategic implementation and improved decision-making aligned with sustainability reporting.Research limitations/implications: The study's findings will support regulators, policymakers and institutional investors in bridging the sustainability gap. By categorizing countries based on their ESG framework development stages, the study aims to provide benchmark practices for countries in the early stages of ESG disclosure. This will address information asymmetry issues and facilitate the establishment of resilient business operations and reporting practices. Ultimately, the study promotes long-term social and economic well-being by strengthening emerging sustainable practices.Originality/value: To the best of the authors' knowledge, this study represents a novel contribution to the existing literature by analyzing the varying levels of development in the ESG policy framework across countries. It fills a gap in current research by providing a comprehensive assessment of the ESG landscape and highlighting the disparities and advancements in different countries. This study aims to shed light on the state of ESG policies and practices globally, providing valuable insights for future research and policy development in the field.

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to establish the relationship between environmental‒social disclosure scores and corporate financial performance. The authors tried to investigate the relevance of assurance practice (whether or not companies’ assessment policies are subject to individual assessment for the given period) and value relevance in foreign-owned firms.Design/methodology/approach: This research is based on accounting-based valuation model proposed by Berthelotet al.(2003), considering the market value of equity as the function of book value and other financial indicators including Return of Assets and Return on Capital Employed. Environmental and social disclosure scores are extracted from Bloomberg database as the measure of company’s transparency in reporting value relevance information and sustainable development. The study considers the sample period of 8 years (2008‒15) and uses static (fixed effects and random effects) and dynamic (generalised methods of moments (GMM)) panel data estimations for analysing and concluding results.Findings: The results support the evidence of environmental disclosure score as performance relevance indicator. Environmental disclosure score highlights the positive and significant relationship with different performance indicators. The interaction between foreign ownership and environmental disclosure represents a negative association, implying that foreign ownership is incubating more on profit making rather than environmental protection initiatives. However, in the context of the social disclosure score, a positive association with economic performance is found. But interaction term between foreign ownership and social disclosure represented a negative coefficient.Originality/value: Value relevance disclosures are investigated with performance indicators that create an incentive for stakeholders. Also, the effect of foreign ownership and value relevance interaction term on firm’s financial performance is determined. To the best of authors’ understanding, previous literature is silent about this dimension. The authors also tried to incorporate the solution to the endogeneity issue by using GMM.