Sectoral analysis of ESG (environmental, social, and governance) integration in corporate governance: insights from sustainable finance

Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan Indonesia June 06, 2025 Volume 11, Number 3 5 authors

Abstract

This research explores the critical intersection of sustainable finance and corporate governance, emphasizing the role of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) factors across various industry sectors. The primary objective is to highlight how ESG considerations impact long-term value creation and risk mitigation within sectors such as technology, semiconductors, building, commercial services, and healthcare. Through a comparative analysis of ESG scores, the study aims to uncover patterns and discrepancies in ESG integration across these sectors, providing insights into their respective commitments to sustainability. To address the reviewer's feedback, the study clearly articulates its research goal: to assess how different sectors perform regarding ESG metrics and identify the factors contributing to observed variations. The methodology includes the collection of secondary ESG data from reputable sources, such as the Dow Jones Sustainability Index, using statistical analysis to identify trends and differences in ESG adherence. The findings reveal significant sector-specific variations, with technology and semiconductor sectors achieving the highest ESG scores, while the building and healthcare sectors exhibit substantial room for improvement. The implications of these results are practical; businesses can leverage these insights to enhance their ESG integration strategies. In conclusion, the study advocates for a stronger incorporation of ESG metrics into corporate decision-making processes, promoting a future of sustainable and ethical business practices across industries. By doing so, it aims to foster long-term resilience and positive societal impact.

Authors

  1. Andi Primafira Bumandava Eka

    STIE Manajemen Bisnis Indonesia

  2. PA Andiena Nindya Putri

    ITB Stikom Bali

  3. Rita Zulbetti

    Universitas Muhammadiyah Bandung

  4. Loso Judijanto

    IPOSS Jakarta

  5. Klemens Mere

    Universitas Wisnuwardhana

Keywords

Sustainable FinanceCorporate GovernanceESG IntegrationFinancial StrategyRisk Mitigation.

References

  1. Aldowaish, A., Kokuryo, J., Almazyad, O., & Goi, H. C. (2022). Environmental, Social, and Governance Integration into the Business Model: Literature Review and Research Agenda. Sustainability, 14(5), 2959. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su14052959
  2. Allen, M., Tessier, S., & Laurin, C. (2023). Corporate Social Responsibility of Financial Cooperatives: A Multi-Level Analysis. Sustainability, 15(6), 4739. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su15064739
  3. Alojail, M., & Khan, S. B. (2023). Impact of Digital Transformation toward Sustainable Development. Sustainability, 15(20), 14697. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su152014697
  4. Arian, A., Sands, J., & Tooley, S. (2023). Industry and Stakeholder Impacts on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Financial Performance: Consumer vs. Industrial Sectors. Sustainability, 15(16), 12254. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su151612254
  5. Becchetti, L., Bobbio, E., Prizia, F., & Semplici, L. (2022). Going Deeper into the S of ESG: A Relational Approach to the Definition of Social Responsibility. Sustainability, 14(15), 9668. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su14159668
  6. Bradač Hojnik, B., & Huđek, I. (2023). Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises in the Digital Age: Understanding Characteristics and Essential Demands. Information, 14(11), 606. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/info14110606
  7. Buganová, K., Hudáková, M., Šimíčková, J., & Mošková, E. (2023). Disparities in the Implementation of Risk Management in the SMEs. Systems, 11(2), 71. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/systems11020071
  8. Chen, L., & Chen, Y. (2023). A Metaorganizations Perspective on Digital Innovation and Corporate Social Responsibility: Evidence from China. Sustainability, 15(14), 11031. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su151411031
  9. Cho, S., Chung, C., & Young, J. (2019). Study on the Relationship between CSR and Financial Performance. Sustainability, 11(2), 343. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su11020343
  10. Daradkeh, M. (2023). Navigating the Complexity of Entrepreneurial Ethics: A Systematic Review and Future Research Agenda. Sustainability, 15(14), 11099. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su151411099
  11. Del Baldo, M., & Palazzi, F. (2023). High-Growth Benefit Corporations: Leveraging on Intangibles—Insights from Italy. Sustainability, 15(14), 10974. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su151410974
  12. Diantaris, M. T. A. (2023, September 15). Environmental, social, and governance: Why ESG priorities differ across industries. The Jurnals. https://doi.jurnals.net/l73eb
  13. Duan, Y., Yang, F., & Xiong, L. (2023). Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Performance and Firm Value: Evidence from Chinese Manufacturing Firms. Sustainability, 15(17), 12858. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su151712858
  14. ElAlfy, A., Palaschuk, N., El-Bassiouny, D., Wilson, J., & Weber, O. (2020). Scoping the Evolution of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Research in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Era. Sustainability, 12(14), 5544. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su12145544
  15. Faedfar, S., Özyeşil, M., Çıkrıkçı, M., & Benhür Aktürk, E. (2022). Effective Risk Management and Sustainable Corporate Performance Integrating Innovation and Intellectual Capital: An Application on Istanbul Exchange Market. Sustainability, 14(18), 11532. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su141811532
  16. Feng, X., & Goli, A. (2023). Enhancing Business Performance through Circular Economy: A Comprehensive Mathematical Model and Statistical Analysis. Sustainability, 15(16), 12631. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su151612631
  17. Fuadah, L. L., Mukhtaruddin, M., Andriana, I., & Arisman, A. (2022). The Ownership Structure, and the Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Disclosure, Firm Value and Firm Performance: The Audit Committee as Moderating Variable. Economies, 10(12), 314. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/economies10120314
  18. Gupta, H., & Chaudhary, R. (2023). An Analysis of Volatility and Risk-Adjusted Returns of ESG Indices in Developed and Emerging Economies. Risks, 11(10), 182. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/risks11100182
  19. Hamad, H. A., & Cek, K. (2023). The Moderating Effects of Corporate Social Responsibility on Corporate Financial Performance: Evidence from OECD Countries. Sustainability, 15(11), 8901. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su15118901
  20. Jin, X., & Lei, X. (2023). A Study on the Mechanism of ESG’s Impact on Corporate Value under the Concept of Sustainable Development. Sustainability, 15(11), 8442. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su15118442
  21. Kyaw, K. (2020). Market Volatility and Investors’ View of Firm-Level Risk: A Case of Green Firms. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 13(8), 175. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jrfm13080175
  22. Licandro, O., Vázquez-Burguete, J. L., Ortigueira, L., & Correa, P. (2023). Definition of Corporate Social Responsibility as a Management Philosophy Oriented towards the Management of Externalities: Proposal and Argumentation. Sustainability, 15(13), 10722. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su151310722
  23. Lima, O., Fernandes, G., & Tereso, A. (2023). Benefits of Adopting Innovation and Sustainability Practices in Project Management within the SME Context. Sustainability, 15(18), 13411. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su151813411
  24. Ma, C., Chishti, M. F., Durrani, M. K., Bashir, R., Safdar, S., & Hussain, R. T. (2023). The Corporate Social Responsibility and Its Impact on Financial Performance: A Case of Developing Countries. Sustainability, 15(4), 3724. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su15043724
  25. Pech, M., & Vrchota, J. (2022). The Product Customization Process in Relation to Industry 4.0 and Digitalization. Processes, 10(3), 539. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/pr10030539
  26. Phonthanukitithaworn, C., Srisathan, W. A., Ketkaew, C., & Naruetharadhol, P. (2023). Sustainable Development towards Openness SME Innovation: Taking Advantage of Intellectual Capital, Sustainable Initiatives, and Open Innovation. Sustainability, 15(3), 2126. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su15032126
  27. Rivera, L., Ortiz, N., Moreno, G., & Páez-Gabriunas, I. (2023). The Effect of Company Ownership on the Environmental Practices in the Supply Chain: An Empirical Approach. Sustainability, 15(16), 12450. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su151612450
  28. Sáez de Cámara, E., Fernández, I., & Castillo-Eguskitza, N. (2021). A Holistic Approach to Integrate and Evaluate Sustainable Development in Higher Education. The Case Study of the University of the Basque Country. Sustainability, 13(1), 392. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su13010392
  29. Sapountzaki, K. (2022). Risk Mitigation, Vulnerability Management, and Resilience under Disasters. Sustainability, 14(6), 3589. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su14063589
  30. Shalhoob, H., & Hussainey, K. (2022). Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) Disclosure and the Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) Sustainability Performance. Sustainability, 15(1), 200. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su15010200
  31. Umair, S., Waqas, U., Mrugalska, B., & Al Shamsi, I. R. (2023). Environmental Corporate Social Responsibility, Green Talent Management, and Organization’s Sustainable Performance in the Banking Sector of Oman: The Role of Innovative Work Behavior and Green Performance. Sustainability, 15(19), 14303. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su151914303
  32. Vrečko, I., Tominc, P., & Širec, K. (2023). Enhancing the Performance of High-Growth Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises through Effective Project-Management Processes and Stakeholder Engagement: A Systems Perspective. Systems, 11(10), 511. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/systems11100511
  33. Wang, L., Ur Rehman, A., Xu, Z., Amjad, F., & Ur Rehman, S. (2023). Green Corporate Governance, Green Finance, and Sustainable Performance Nexus in Chinese SMES: A Mediation Moderation Model. Sustainability, 15(13), 9914. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su15139914
  34. Wang, Y., Han, Y., Du, Q., & Hou, D. (2023). Executive Overconfidence and Corporate Environmental, Social, and Governance Performance. Sustainability, 15(21), 15570. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su152115570
  35. Zhang, J., & Liu, Z. (2023). Study on the Impact of Corporate ESG Performance on Green Innovation Performance—Evidence from Listed Companies in China A-Shares. Sustainability, 15(20), 14750. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su152014750
  36. Zhang, Y., Imeni, M., & Edalatpanah, S. A. (2023). Environmental Dimension of Corporate Social Responsibility and Earnings Persistence: An Exploration of the Moderator Roles of Operating Efficiency and Financing Cost. Sustainability, 15(20), 14814. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su152014814
  37. Zumente, I., & Bistrova, J. (2021). ESG Importance for Long-Term Shareholder Value Creation: Literature vs. Practice. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 7(2), 127. Elsevier BV. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7020127