Environmental, social and governance (ESG) controversies have gained increasing attention due to their potential impact on corporate governance, financial stability and stakeholder trust. This study investigated the association between ESG controversies and auditing at both the beginning and end of the audit engagement, focusing on audit fees, auditor opinion, auditor early resignation (AER) and the influence of audit reports (ARs) on ESG controversies. This study employs a sample of 367 non-financial UK firms from the industry, energy and basic materials sectors and constructs an imbalanced dataset comprising 3,670 full-year observations covering the period 2014–2023. Employing system-pooled logit and pooled ordinary least squares (OLS) regression analyses and supported by two-step generalized method of moments (GMM), the findings indicate that ESG controversies significantly affect audit fees and auditor selection: Firms experiencing higher ESG controversies are more likely to engage BIG4 audit firms, which impose elevated fees. However, ESG controversies do not appear to be a sufficient reason for the auditor’s early resignation. Additionally, modified ARs are found to contribute to ESG controversies, as auditors highlighting key audit matters—such as low ESG performance and ESG-related risks—can further amplify ESG concerns. This investigation incorporates stakeholder theory, signalling theory and information asymmetry theory to provide stakeholders with valuable insights. It highlights the auditors’ role in ensuring ESG transparency and managing ESG-related risks. Managers must consider the financial impact of ESG controversies, including higher audit costs and reputational risks tied to BIG4 firms. Auditors should assess ESG controversies when auditing risk, evaluating clients and ensuring the reliability of audit-proofing.
AdamsT., KrishnanJ., & KrishnanJ. (2021). Client influence and auditor independence revisited: Evidence from auditor resignations. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 40(5), 106846. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2021.106846
2.
AgneseP., BattagliaF., BusatoF., & TaddeoS. (2023). ESG controversies and governance: Evidence from the banking industry. Finance Research Letters, 53, 103397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2022.103397
3.
AlexeyevaI., & SundgrenS. (2022). Do going concern disclosures in the management report and audit report signal bankruptcy risk? Evidence from privately held firms. International Journal of Auditing, 26(2), 171–192. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijau.12257
4.
AlharasisE. E., AlshdaifatS. M., AlmarayehT., HasanE. F., & Al-HamadeenR. (2025). Audit quality moderating effect on the relationship between earnings management and ESG reporting in the Jordanian banking industry. Discover Sustainability, 6, 973. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-025-01803-8
5.
Al-ShaerH., & ZamanM. (2019). CEO compensation and sustainability reporting assurance: Evidence from the UK. Journal of Business Ethics, 158, 233–252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3735-8
6.
AouadiA., & MarsatS. (2018). Do ESG controversies matter for firm value? Evidence from international data. Journal of Business Ethics, 151, 1027–1047. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10551-016-3213-8
7.
ArellanoM., & BoverO. (1995). Another look at the instrumental variable estimation of error-components models. Journal of Econometrics, 68(1), 29–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(94)01642-D
8.
Asante-AppiahB. (2020). Does the severity of a client’s negative environmental, social and governance reputation affect audit effort and audit quality?Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 39(3), 106713. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2019.106713
9.
AwaH. O., EtimW., & OgbondaE. (2024). Stakeholders, stakeholder theory and corporate social responsibility (CSR). International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, 9(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40991-024-00094-y
10.
BaatwahS. R. (2023). Key audit matters and Big4 auditors in Oman: A quantile approach analysis. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting, 21(5), 1124–1148. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFRA-09-2021-0289
11.
BeckmannJ., & RogmannJ. (2024). Determinants and effects of country ESG controversy. Energy Economics, 131, 107326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2024.107326
12.
Bel-OmsI. (2025). Determinants and consequences of environmental, social and governance controversies. Status quo and limitations of recent empirical quantitative research. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 32(2), 2412–2437. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.3071
13.
BerghD. D., KetchenD. J., OrlandiI., HeugensP. P., & BoydB. K. (2018). Information asymmetry in management research: Past accomplishments and future opportunities. Journal of Management, 45(1), 122–158. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206318798026
14.
BowleyT., & HillJ. G. (2024). The global ESG stewardship ecosystem. European Business Organization Law Review, 25, 229–268. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40804-024-00316-7
15.
BurkeJ. J., HoitashR., & HoitashU. (2019). Auditor response to negative media coverage of client environmental, social, and governance practices. Accounting Horizons, 33(3), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.2308/acch-52450
16.
Capelle-BlancardG., & PetitA. (2017). The weighting of CSR dimensions: One size does not fit all. Business & Society, 56(6), 919–943. https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650315620118
17.
CarberryE. J., EngelenP.-J., & Van EssenM. (2018). Which firms get punished for unethical behavior? Explaining variation in stock market reactions to corporate misconduct. Business Ethics Quarterly, 28(2), 119–151. https://doi.org/10.1017/beq.2017.46
18.
CenkerW. J., & NagyA. L. (2008). Auditor resignations and auditor industry specialization. Accounting Horizons, 22(3), 279–295. https://doi.org/10.2308/acch.2008.22.3.279
19.
ChenH., ShaowenH., LiuZ., & ZhangM. (2019). Audit fees, perceived audit risk, and the financial crisis of 2008. Asian Review of Accounting, 27(1), 97–111. https://doi.org/10.1108/ARA-01-2017-0007
20.
ChenZ., & XieG. (2022). ESG disclosure and financial performance: Moderating role of ESG investors. International Review of Financial Analysis, 83, 102291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2022.102291
21.
ChoM., & ChoiA. (2026). Do auditors adjust labour allocation in response to client media coverage and tone?Abacus. https://doi.org/10.1111/abac.70024
22.
DiabA., & EissaA. M. (2024). ESG performance, auditor choice, and audit opinion: Evidence from an emerging market. Sustainability, 16(1), 124. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16010124
23.
DordzhievaA., LauxV., & ZhengR. (2022). Signaling private information via accounting system design. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 74(1), 101494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2022.101494
24.
DorfleitnerG., KreuzerC., & SparrerC. (2022). To sin in secret is no sin at all: On the linkage of policy, society, culture, and firm characteristics with corporate scandals. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 202, 762–784. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2022.08.027
25.
ElamerA. A., & BoulhagaM. (2024). ESG controversies and corporate performance: The moderating effect of governance mechanisms and ESG practices. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 31(4), 3312–3327. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2749
26.
El-DeebM. S., IsmailT. H., & El BannaA. A. (2023). Does audit quality moderate the impact of environmental, social and governance disclosure on firm value? Further evidence from Egypt. Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences, 5(4), 293–322. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHASS-11-2022-0155
FrostT., ShanL., TsangA., & YuM. (2022). Media coverage of corporate social irresponsibility and audit fees: International evidence. International Journal of Auditing, 26(4), 467–493. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijau.12291
29.
GallettaS., & MazzùS. (2023). ESG controversies and bank risk taking. Business Strategy and the Environment, 32(1), 274–288. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3129
30.
García-AmateA., Ramírez-OrellanaA., Rojo-RamírezA. A., & Casado-BelmonteM. P. (2023). Do ESG controversies moderate the relationship between CSR and corporate financial performance in oil and gas firms?Humanities and Social Science Communication, 10, 749. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02256-y
31.
GhoshA., & TangC. Y. (2015). Auditor resignation and risk factors. Accounting Horizons, 29(3), 529–549. https://doi.org/10.2308/acch-51074
32.
GhoshS. (2023). Auditor exits and firm performance: Is there a link?Journal of Emerging Market Finance, 22(1), 31–56. https://doi.org/10.1177/09726527221144486
33.
GidageM., & BhideS. (2025). Exploring the ESG–audit fees nexus: Insights from Indian firms. Managerial Auditing Journal, 40(7), 1136–1167. https://doi.org/10.1108/MAJ-09-2024-4510
34.
Giráldez-PuigP., MorenoI., Perez-CaleroL., & Guerrero VillegasJ. (2024). ESG controversies and insolvency risk: Evidence from the insurance industry. Management Decision, 63(2), 610–639. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-10-2023-2002
35.
GoicoecheaE., Gómez-BezaresF., & UgarteJ. V. (2021). Improving audit reports: A consensus between auditors and users. International Journal of Financial Studies, 9(2), 25. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijfs9020025
36.
GuestD. E., SandersK., RodriguesR., & OliveiraT. (2021). Signalling theory as a framework for analysing human resource management processes and integrating human resource attribution theories: A conceptual analysis and empirical exploration. Human Resource Management Journal, 31(3), 796–818. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12326
37.
HapsoroD., & SuryantoT. (2017). Consequences of going concern opinion for financial reports of business firms and capital markets with auditor reputation as a moderation variable: An experimental study. European Research Studies Journal, 20(2A), 197–223. https://doi.org/10.35808/ERSJ/637
38.
HegazyK., ChongH. G., & KamareldawlaN. M. (2023). Investigating the factors of selecting audit clients: Evidence from an emerging market. Corporate Ownership & Control, 20(4), 97–112. https://doi.org/10.22495/cocv20i4art7
39.
HoL., NguyenV. H., & DangT. L. (2024). ESG and firm performance: Do stakeholder engagement, financial constraints and religiosity matter?Journal of Asian Business and Economic Studies, 31(4), 263–276. https://doi.org/10.1108/JABES-08-2023-0306
40.
HörischJ., SchalteggerS., & FreemanR. E. (2020). Integrating stakeholder theory and sustainability accounting: A conceptual synthesis. Journal of Cleaner Production, 275, 124097. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124097
41.
HouH., YangY., & LvH. (2022). The impact of ESG performance on audit fees—A study based on a two-way fixed effects model. BCP Business & Management, 30, 595–603. https://doi.org/10.54691/bcpbm.v30i.2505
42.
HuangT.-C., LinY.-H., ChaiD., & HairstonS. (2025). Are auditors insulated to positive client news? Evidence from audit fees and going-concern opinions. Accounting & Finance, 65, 2339–2386. https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.13407
43.
International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board. (2018). International Standard on Auditing 210: Agreeing the terms of audit engagements. International Federation of Accountants.
44.
JainS., & AgarwallaS. K. (2023). Big-4 auditors and audit quality: A novel firm life-cycle approach. Meditari Accountancy Research, 31(5), 1436–1452. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-06-2021-1344
45.
JucáM. N., MurenP. D., ValentinčičA., & IchevR. (2024). The impact of ESG controversies on the financial performance of firms: An analysis of industry and country clusters. Borsa Istanbul Review, 24(6), 1305–1315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bir.2024.08.001
46.
KammounI., & KhoufiW. (2023). Sustainable performance, conditional conservatism and audit fees. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting, 23(6), 2484–2513. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFRA-10-2022-0396
47.
KassemR. (2018). Assessing management integrity: Insights from Big 4 auditors in Egypt. Current Issues in Auditing, 12(1), A29–A39. https://doi.org/10.2308/ciia-52117
48.
KharuddinK. A. M., BasioudisI. G., & FarooqueO. A. (2021). Effects of the Big 4 national and city-level industry expertise on audit quality in the United Kingdom. Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, 43, 100398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intaccaudtax.2021.100398
49.
KimH. J., AhnT.-W., & YiJ. (2025). ESG controversies and firm value: Moderating role of ESG performance. Asia Pacific Journal of Financial Studies, 54(2), 228–269. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajfs.70001
50.
KyereM., & AusloosM. (2021). Corporate governance and firms financial performance in the United Kingdom. International Journal of Finance & Economics, 26(2), 1871–1885. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijfe.1883
51.
La RosaF., & BerniniF. (2022). ESG controversies and the cost of equity capital of European listed companies: The moderating effects of ESG performance and market securities regulation. International Journal of Accounting and Information Management, 30(5), 641–663. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJAIM-03-2022-0047
52.
LingS., XiaH., & LiuZ. (2024). ESG rating divergence and audit fees: Evidence from China. Finance Research Letters, 67, 105749. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2024.105749
53.
López-ConcepciónA., Gil-LacruzA. I., & Saz-GilI. (2022). Stakeholder engagement, CSR development and SDGs compliance: A systematic review from 2015 to 2021. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 29(1), 19–31. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2170
54.
MahajanR., LimW. M., SareenM., KumarS., & PanwarR. (2023). Stakeholder theory. Journal of Business Research, 166, 114104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.114104
55.
MaksymovE., PeecherM., SutherlandA., & WeberJ. (2024). Audit partners’ role in material misstatement resolution: Survey and interview evidence. Journal of Accounting Research, 62(1), 275–333. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-679X.12506
56.
MasmoudiS., & AlsmadyA. A. (2026). The role of the audit committee on ESG performance of non-financial firms listed on the French CAC 40. Discover Sustainability, 7, 1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-025-02358-4
57.
Matuszewska-PierzynkaA., MrzygłódU., & Pieloch-BabiarzA. (2023). ESG performance and dividend stability of the world’s largest enterprises. Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, 19(4), 184–217. https://doi.org/10.7341/20231946
58.
MendirattaA., SinghS., YadavS. S., & MahajanA. (2023). ESG controversies and firm performance in India: The moderating impact of government effectiveness. Global Business Review. https://doi.org/10.1177/09721509231151490
59.
NaeemN., CankayaS., & BildikR. (2022). Does ESG performance affect the financial performance of environmentally sensitive industries? A comparison between emerging and developed markets. Borsa Istanbul Review, 22(Suppl. 2), S128–S140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bir.2022.11.014
60.
NagyA. L., SherwoodM. G., & ZimmermanA. B. (2023). CPAs and Big 4 office audit quality. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 42(2), 107018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2022.107018
61.
Narváez-CastilloV. P., García-BenauM. A., Sierra-GarcíaL., & GambettaN. (2024). Are material ESG issues making their way into key audit matters? An analysis of Colombian innovative companies. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 9(4), 100574. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2024.100574
62.
NaseerM. M., GuoY., & ZhuX. (2025). Short-term costs and long-term gains of ESG initiatives in high-risk environments: Evidence from UK firms. Development and Sustainability in Economics and Finance, 7, 100075. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsef.2025.100075
63.
NiemiL., KnechelW. R., OjalaH., & CollisJ. (2018). Responsiveness of auditors to the audit risk standards: Unique evidence from Big 4 audit firms. Accounting in Europe, 15(1), 33–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449480.2018.1431398
64.
OwensJ., SaundersK., SchachnerS., & ThornockT. (2024). How management disclosure and auditor disclosure affect auditor liability: The case of the going concern financial accounting standard. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 43(4), 143–162. https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-2022-008
65.
Raja AhmadR. A., SamsuddinM. E., AzmiN. A., & AbdullahN (2023). Is environmental, social and governance (ESG) disclosure value enhancing? Evidence from top 100 companies. Asia-Pacific Management Accounting Journal (APMAJ), 18(2), 143–163. https://doi.org/10.24191/APMAJ.V18i2-06
66.
RamaD. V., & ReadW. J. (2006). Resignations by the Big 4 and the market for audit services. Accounting Horizons, 20(2), 97–109. https://doi.org/10.2308/acch.2006.20.2.97
67.
RazakL. A., IbrahimM. H., & NgA. (2023). Environment, social and governance (ESG) performance and CDS spreads: The role of country sustainability. The Journal of Risk Finance, 24(5), 585–613. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRF-10-2022-0278
68.
SahuM., MishraA., AlahdalW. M., & SamiM. (2025). ESG performance and audit committee expertise: Advancing sustainable development goals in leading nations. International Review of Economics & Finance, 103, 104445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2025.104445
69.
ShakilM. H. (2024). Environmental, social and governance controversies: A bibliometric review and research agenda. Finance Research Letters, 70, 106325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2024.106325
70.
SongY., WuH., & MaY. (2023). Does ESG performance affect audit pricing? Evidence from China. International Review of Financial Analysis, 90, 102890. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2023.102890
71.
Tamayo-TorresI., Gutierrez-GutierrezL., & Ruiz-MorenoA. (2018). Boosting sustainability and financial performance: The role of supply chain controversies. International Journal of Production Research, 57(11), 3719–3734. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2018.1562248
72.
TambeT. F., & KangS. M. (2026). ESG controversies and non-audit service fees: European evidence. Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-026-06259-y
73.
TomsS. (2019). Financial scandals: A historical overview. Accounting and Business Research, 49(5), 477–499. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2019.1610591
74.
TreepongkarunaS., KyawK., & JirapornP. (2024). ESG controversies and corporate governance: Evidence from board size. Business Strategy and the Environment, 33(5), 4218–4232. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3697
75.
WangX., SongX., & SunM. (2023). How does a company’s ESG performance affect the issuance of an audit opinion? The moderating role of auditor experience. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(5), 3878. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20053878
76.
WangY.-F., & ChaoC.-C. (2024). ESG risk and audit firm reputation. International Journal of Business and Economic Sciences Applied Research, 17(1), 38–57. https://doi.org/10.25103/ijbesar.171.03
77.
WenH., GengY., & CuiL. (2025). Auditors’ workload pressure and firm financial fraud. Finance Research Letters, 86, 108822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2025.108822
78.
WuZ., LinS., ChenT., LuoC., & XuH. (2023). Does effective corporate governance mitigate the negative effect of ESG controversies on firm value? Economic Analysis and Policy, 80, 1772–1793. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eap.2023.11.018
79.
XueR., WangH., YangY., LinnenlueckeM. K., JinK., & CaiC. W. (2023). The adverse impact of corporate ESG controversies on sustainable investment. Journal of Cleaner Production, 427, 139237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.139237
80.
YuZ., FarooqU., & AlamM. M. (2024). How does environmental, social, and governance (ESG) performance determine investment mix? New empirical evidence from BRICS. Borsa Istanbul Review, 24(3), 520–529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bir.2024.02.007
81.
ZahidR. A., KhanM. K., AnwarW., & MaqsoodU. S. (2022). The role of audit quality in the ESG-corporate financial performance nexus: Empirical evidence from Western European companies. Borsa Istanbul Review, 22(Suppl. 2), S200–S212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bir.2022.08.011
ZhangK., LiuX., & WangJ. (2023). Exploring the relationship between corporate ESG information disclosure and audit fees: Evidence from non-financial A-share listed companies in China. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 11, 1196728. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2023.1196728
