THE ROLE OF ESG RISK ASSESSMENT IN CORPORATE PROJECTS: A MULTIDIMENSIONAL THEORETICAL AND EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS
Abstract
This study examines the multidimensional role of ESG risk assessment in corporate projects through theoretical frameworks (stakeholder theory, institutional complexity) and empirical analysis of Chinese A-share manufacturing firms (2013–2023; 23,660 observations). Key findings reveal ESG performance significantly enhances corporate high-quality development (β=0.185, p<0.01), with environmental risk management showing the strongest marginal impact. Digital transformation acts as a critical positive moderator: each 1-unit increase in digitization amplifies ESG’s value contribution by 23.7% through dual mechanisms – efficiency gains (e.g., blockchain reducing ESG report errors by 65%) and signal enhancement (IoT data increasing green premiums by 2.3%). Significant industry heterogeneity exists: high-tech firms achieve higher ESG governance efficiency (0.9071) versus traditional manufacturers (0.3994), attributed to green innovation synergies. Institutional complexity (e.g., conflicting domestic/international rating weights) drives ESG rating divergences, prompting the proposed "Dynamic Adaptive Governance Framework." This framework advocates risk quantification via an ESG Risk Matrix (e.g., CO₂ intensity × carbon price sensitivity), differentiated resource allocation (high-tech: 2.5%–3.2% revenue for R&D; traditional: 55% ESG budget to environmental tech), and institutional adaptation ("GLOBE-Local" strategies like emphasizing religious respect in Southeast Asia). Methodologically, the DN-DDF efficiency model uncovers stage-specific bottlenecks, showing sustainability phases lag profitability stages by 7.4% efficiency. Practical implications include leveraging digital tools for ESG compliance and customizing governance by industry/region. Limitations involve environmental data gaps and dynamic external shocks. The research validates ESG’s economic value through multidimensional risk interactions, establishes digitization as a key enabler, and provides actionable benchmarks for complex institutional environments.
References
Fang Xianming, Hu Ding. (2023). Corporate ESG performance and innovation-Evidence from A-share listed companies. Economic Research, no. 58(2), pp. 91-106.
Mao Qilian, Wang Yueqing. (2023). Research on the employment effect of ESG:Evidence from Chinese listed companies. Economic Research, no. 58(7), pp. 86-103.
Christensen, D. M., G. Serafeim, and A. Sikochi. (2022). Why is Corporate Virtue in the Eye of the Beholder? The Case of ESG Ratings. Accounting Review, no. 97(1), pp. 147-175. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2308/TAR-2019-0506
Houston, J. F., and H. Y. Shan. (2022). Corporate ESG Profiles and Banking Relationships. Review of Finance, no. 35(7), pp. 3373-3417. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhab125
Samet, M. and Jarboui, A. (2017). How Does Corporate Social Responsibility Contribute to Investment Efficiency? Journal of Multinational Financial Management, no. 40, pp. 33-46. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mulfin.2017.05.007
N ai, L. R. and Pissarides, C. A. (2007). Structural Change in a Multisector Model of Growth. American Economic Review, no. 97, pp. 429-443. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.97.1.429
Schuler D A, Cording M. (2006). A corporate social performance-corporate financial performance behavioral model for consumers. Academy of Management Review, no. 31(3), pp. 540-558. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2006.21318916
Amore M. D., Schneider C., Zaldokas A. (2013) Credit Supply and Corporate Innovation, Journal of Financial Economics, no. 109(3), pp. 835-855. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2013.04.006
Huang D. Z. X. (2022). Environmental, Social and Governance Factors and Assessing Firm Value: Valuation, Signaling and Stakeholder Perspectives. Accounting and Finance, no. 62, pp. 1983-2010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.12849
Rezaee Z., Tuo L. (2019). Are the Quantity and Quality of Sustainability Disclosures Associated with the Innate and Discretionary Earnings Quality?. Journal of Business Ethics, no. 155(3), pp. 763-786. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3546-y
Avramov D, Cheng S, Lioui A, et al. (2022). Sustainable investing with ESG rating uncertainty , Journal of Financial Economics, no. 145, pp. 642-664 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2021.09.009
Wenjie MA, Bojian YU (2023). Corporate ownership attributes and the divergence of ESG ratings in China and abroad. Financial Research, no. 49(06), pp. 124-136. DOI: https://doi.org/10.16538/j.cnki.jfe.20230221.103
Qin Xiaoyu, Li Jiahui, and Qu Yue. (2024). The Impact of the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism on China's Foreign Trade. Journal of Shandong University of Science and Technology (Social Sciences), no. 26(05), pp. 96-105. DOI: 10.16452/j.cnki.sdkjsk.2024.05.010
Samsung (China) Investment Co., LTD. (2024). China Samsung Rural Revitalization Report (2021-2024).
Cleeren K., van Heerde H. J., Dekimpe M. G. (2013). Rising from the Ashes: How Brands and Categories Can Overcome Product-Harm Crises. Journal of Marketing, no. 77(2), pp. 58-77. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1509/jm.10.041
Wang Tao, Luo Kaifan, Yu Chao. (2025) Corporate ESG practices under institutional complexity: a research review and outlook. Foreign Economy and Management, no. 47(04), pp. 21-39. DOI: https://doi.org/10.16538/j.cnki.fem.20241128.203
Qin Ya, Long Huaping. (2025). High-quality development of manufacturing industry from ESG perspective - Moderating effect based on digital transformation. E-Commerce Review, no. 14(5), pp. 3307-3318. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12677/ecl.2025.1451643
Beijing Shougang Corporation, Metallurgical Industry Planning and Research Institute, Capital University of Economics and Business China ESG Research Institute, etc. (2023). Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) Part 2 evaluation requirements for steel enterprises. Chinese group standard. T/SSEA 266.2-2023.
Hsu S Y, Chiu S Y, Chiu Y. (2025). Taiwan telecommunication AI industry ESG disclosure. Scientific Reports, no. 15(1), pp. 1-19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-04585-1
