This article aims to determine the impact of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) performance on global investors. Moreover, the study uses market capitalization (proxy of firm size) as a moderator, where the effect of firm size on the relationship between ESG and global investors is assessed. This study measures linear and non-linear associations among the variables. Employing quantile regression for the 25th, 50th, and 75th quantiles, panel data regression analysis (QPDRA) is applied to examine the association between ESG score and global investors. For the study, data of 316 Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) Standard & Poor’s (S&P) 500 listed non-financial enterprises in India during 12 years (2011–2023) are combined. The study found that ESG has positive and linear effects on global investors at low and moderate levels, whereas ESG has a negative non-linear association (forming an inverted U-shaped curve) with global investors as well. Furthermore, market capitalization also influences the relationship between ESG and global investors at low quantiles. This study’s findings help managers to consider firm size and ESG factors while attracting international investors to the business. The results also provide information on the potential future growth of corporations to the board of directors and other authorities. International shareholders’ activity and ownership diversification in small and large companies can improve sustainability disclosure standards. We do not observe any article reporting the linear and non-linear relationship where ESG, global investors, and market capitalization are assessed on Indian firms. The research’s conclusions can guide Indian businesses, outlining a workable structure for highlighting the value of ESG disclosure in investment aspects. Therefore, the current article ensures novelty and multiple contributions.
AbdullahN., & ZainalS. (2017). The relationship between ownership structure and corporate social performance: Evidence from Malaysian listed companies. Journal of Financial Economic Policy, 9(1), 1–16.
2.
AdeniyiS. I., & AdebayoH. O. (2018). Effect of financial leverage on voluntary corporate social disclosure among listed firms on Nigerian stock exchange: A study of selected manufacturing firms. Academic Journal of Economic Studies, 4(3), 18–24.
3.
AkgunO. T., MudgeT. J., & TownsendB. (2021). How company size bias in ESG scores impacts the small cap investor. The Journal of Impact and ESG Investing, 1(4), 31–44.
4.
AkinwandeM. O., DikkoH. G., & SamsonA. (2015). Variance inflation factor: As a condition for the inclusion of suppressor variable(s) in regression analysis. Open Journal of Statistics, 5(7), 754–767.
5.
Al AmoshH., & KhatibS. F. (2022). Ownership structure and environmental, social, and governance performance disclosure: The moderating role of board independence. Journal of Business and Socio-Economic Development, 2(1), 49–66.
6.
Al AmoshH., & KhatibS. F. (2024). Environmental, social and governance performance disclosure and market value: Evidence from Jordan. Business Perspectives and Research, 12(4), 539–554.
7.
Al AmoshH., & MansorN. (2021). Disclosure of integrated reporting elements by industrial companies: Evidence from Jordan. Journal of Management and Governance, 25(1), 121–145.
8.
AlhazaimehA., PalaniappanR., & AlmsafirM. (2014). The impact of corporate governance and ownership structure on voluntary disclosure in annual reports among listed Jordanian companies. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 129, 341–348.
9.
AlkhawaldehA. A. (2012). Effects of family and foreign ownership structure on Jordanian credit risk assessments. International Research Journal of Finance and Economics, 90, 92–113.
10.
ArouriH., HossainM., & MuttakinM. B. (2014). Effects of board and ownership structure on corporate performance: Evidence from GCC countries. Journal of Accounting in Emerging Economies, 4(1), 117–130.
11.
AsmareE., & BegashawA. (2018). Review on parametric and non-parametric methods of efficiency analysis. Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, 2(1), 1–7.
12.
BaldiniM., MasoL. D., LiberatoreG., MazziF., & TerzaniS. (2018). Role of country-and firm-level determinants in environmental, social, and governance disclosure. Journal of Business Ethics, 150(1), 79–98.
13.
BaltagiB. H., & BaltagiB. H. (2008). Econometric analysis of panel data (Vol. 4). Wiley.
14.
BanerjeeS., & MohantiD. (2025). Foreign institutional ownership and its impact on investment efficiency in manufacturing firms: Evidence from Indian capital market. Business Perspectives and Research, 13(1), 132–144.
15.
BerrisfordA., & ZhangY. (2019). Ownership structure and environmental performance: Evidence from the UK. European Journal of Operational Research, 277(1), 238–249.
16.
BlackM., & YahayaO. A. (2024). Which ownership structure is significant in ESG performance?American Business Review, 27(2), 635–664.
17.
BonacchiM., KleinA., LongoS., & StrampelliG. (2022). The effects of credible voluntary disclosures: Institutional investor engagement and investees’ ESG performances[European Corporate Governance Institute Law working paper no. 622, 10-2139]. European Corporate Governance Institute Law.
18.
BuallayA. M. (2022). Sustainability reporting in different regions. In International perspectives on sustainability reporting (pp. 167–187). Emerald Publishing Limited.
19.
BuallayA., FadelS. M., AlajmiJ., & SaudagaranS. (2020). Sustainability reporting and bank performance after financial crisis: Evidence from developed and developing countries. Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal incorporating Journal of Global Competitiveness, 31(4), 747–770.
20.
CannonJ. N., LingZ., WangQ., & WatanabeO. V. (2020). 10-K disclosure of corporate social responsibility and firms’ competitive advantages. European Accounting Review, 29(1), 85–113.
21.
ChenR., LiuY., JiangY., & LiuJ. (2023). Does ESG performance promote vitality of capital market? Analysis from the perspective of stock liquidity. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 11, 1132845.
22.
ChoC. H., LaineM., RobertsR. W., & RodrigueM. (2015). Organized hypocrisy, organizational façades, and sustainability reporting. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 40(C), 78–94.
23.
DaugaardD., & DingA. (2022). Global drivers for ESG performance: The body of knowledge. Sustainability, 14(4), 2322.
24.
DeeganC. (2002). Introduction: The legitimising effect of social and environmental disclosures—A theoretical foundation. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 15(3), 282–311.
DesJardineM. R., ZhangM., & ShiW. (2023). How shareholders impact stakeholder interests: A review and map for future research. Journal of Management, 49(1), 400–429.
27.
de VincentiisP. (2023). Do international investors care about ESG news?Qualitative Research in Financial Markets, 15(4), 572–588.
28.
DrempeticS., KleiC., & ZwergelB. (2020). The influence of firm size on the ESG score: Corporate sustainability ratings under review. Journal of Business Ethics, 167(2), 333–360.
29.
EcclesR. G., IoannouI., & SerafeimG. (2014). The impact of corporate sustainability on organizational processes and performance. Management Science, 60(11), 2835–2857.
30.
EpsteinA. J. (2016). Systemically overlooked anomalies of governing small-cap companies. In The handbook of board governance: A comprehensive guide for public, private and not-for-profit board members (pp. 731–747). Wiley Online Library.
31.
FreemanR. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Cambridge University Press.
32.
FreemanR. E., & DmytriyevS. (2017). Corporate social responsibility and stakeholder theory: Learning from each other. Symphonya Emerging Issues in Management, (1), 7–15.
33.
GenreV., Guette-KhiterC., & RobinF. (2024). FDI true value: Experimenting with market capitalisation ratios to value unlisted FDI equity. IFC Bulletins chapters. In External statistics in a fragmented and uncertain world (Vol. 62). Bank for International Settlements.
34.
GrahamB. S., HahnJ., PoirierA., & PowellJ. L. (2015). Quantile regression with panel data[NBER working paper no. 21034]. National Bureau of Economic Research.
35.
GregoryR. P. (2024). The influence of firm size on ESG score controlling for ratings agency and industrial sector. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 14(1), 86–99.
36.
GuptaS., YadavS. S., & JainP. K. (2024). Impact of foreign ownership on leverage: A study of Indian firms. Global Business Review, 25(1), 51–67.
HigginsC., & WalkerR. (2012). Ethos, logos, pathos: Strategies of persuasion in social/environmental reports. Accounting Forum, 36(3), 194–208.
39.
HsiaoC. (2007). Panel data analysis: Advantages and challenges. Test, 16(1), 1–22.
40.
HsiehH. H., HodnettK., & van RensburgP. (2012). Fundamental indexation for global equities: Does firm size matter?Journal of Applied Business Research, 28(1), 105–116.
41.
HuangR. D., & ShiuC. Y. (2009). Local effects of foreign ownership in an emerging financial market: Evidence from qualified foreign institutional investors in Taiwan. Financial Management, 38(3), 567–602.
42.
HuberE., RueschemeyerD., & StephensJ. D. (1993). The impact of economic development on democracy. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 7(3), 71–86.
43.
JungH. (2023). The environmental, social, and governance (ESG) rating, firm value, and corporate ownership concentration. International Journal of Advanced Smart Convergence, 12(3), 157–162.
44.
KanoujiyaJ., JainP., BanerjeeS., KalraR., RastogiS., & BhimavarapuV. M. (2023). Impact of leverage on valuation of non-financial firms in India under profitability’s moderating effect: Evidence in scenarios applying quantile regression. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 16(8), 366.
45.
KanoujiyaJ., SinghK., & RastogiS. (2022). Does promoters’ ownership reduce the firm’s financial distress? Evidence from non-financial firms listed in India. Managerial Finance, 49(4), 643–660.
46.
KapoorA., & GuptaS. (2016). Ownership structure and corporate social responsibility in emerging markets: Evidence from India. Business & Society, 55(3), 420–446.
47.
KhemirS. (2019). Perception of ESG criteria by mainstream investors: Evidence from Tunisia. International Journal of Emerging Markets, 14(5), 752–768.
48.
KimE. (2025). The effect of foreign investors on ESG investment efficiency: Evidence from South Korea. Sustainability, 17(5), 2267.
49.
KimI. J., Eppler-KimJ., KimW. S., & ByunS. J. (2010). Foreign investors and corporate governance in Korea. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 18(4), 390–402.
50.
KimW. S., ParkK., & LeeS. H. (2018). Corporate social responsibility, ownership structure, and firm value: Evidence from Korea. Sustainability, 10(8), 2497.
51.
KimM., YuH. K., & KimT. (2025). The contingent effects of foreign ownership on ESG performance under financial performance feedback. Finance Research Letters, 78, 107156.
52.
KlibiE., DamakS., & ElwafiO. (2024). The impact of sustainability assurance levels on market capitalization: The case of French firms. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFRA-03-2024-0162
53.
KoenkerR., & HallockK. F. (2001). Quantile regression. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 15(4), 143–156.
54.
LaunerR. L., & WilkinsonG. N. (2014). Robustness in statistics. Academic Press.
55.
LiY., & ZhangX. (2019). The influence of ownership structure on environmental disclosure: Evidence from Chinese listed companies. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26(2), 216–231.
56.
LoateB., PadiaN., & MarounW. (2015). Acid mine drainage in South Africa: A test of legitimacy theory. Journal of Governance and Regulation, 4(2), 26–40.
57.
MaddalaG. S., & LahiriK. (1992). Introduction to econometrics (Vol. 2, p. 525). Macmillan.
58.
MahmoodZ., AhmadZ., AliW., & EjazA. (2017). Does environmental disclosure relate to environmental performance? Reconciling legitimacy theory and voluntary disclosure theory. Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Sciences (PJCSS), 11(3), 1134–1152.
59.
MajumderR., & HussainA. (2023). Legal framework for corporate sustainability reporting in India. International Journal of Engineering Technology and Management Sciences, 1(7), 1–6.
MishraA. V., & RattiR. A. (2011). Governance, monitoring, and foreign investment in Chinese companies. Emerging Markets Review, 12(2), 171–188.
62.
MishraB., & SharmaA. (2023). An analysis of business responsibility and sustainability report of selected Indian companies. Sachetas, 2(2), 1–14.
63.
MurataR., & HamoriS. (2021). ESG disclosures and stock price crash risk. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 14(2), 70.
64.
ParkS. R., & JangJ. Y. (2021). The impact of ESG management on investment decisions: Institutional investors’ perceptions of country-specific ESG criteria. International Journal of Financial Studies, 9(3), 48.
65.
PengC. W., & YangM. L. (2014). The effect of corporate social performance on financial performance: The moderating effect of ownership concentration. Journal of Business Ethics, 123(1), 171–182.
66.
PuspitasariE., SudiyatnoB., HartotoW. E., & WidatiL. W. (2021). Net interest margin and return on assets: A Case Study in Indonesia. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 8(4), 727–734.
67.
RastogiS., SinghK., & KanoujiyaJ. (2023). Impact of transparency and disclosure (TD) on the market valuation of the firms in India: The moderating role of competition. Business Perspectives and Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/22785337231208314
68.
RastogiS., SinghK., & KanoujiyaJ. (2024a). Firm’s value and ESG: The moderating role of ownership concentration and corporate disclosures. Asian Review of Accounting, 32(1), 70–90.
69.
RastogiS., SinghK., & KanoujiyaJ. (2024b). Impact of shareholders’ activism on the performance of banks in India: A panel data application. Business Perspectives and Research, 12(1), 83–99.
70.
RautR. K., ShastriN., MishraA. K., & TiwariA. K. (2023). Investor’s values and investment decision towards ESG stocks. Review of Accounting and Finance, 22(4), 449–465.
71.
RustamA., WangY., & ZameerH. (2019). Does foreign ownership affect corporate sustainability disclosure in Pakistan? A sequential mixed methods approach. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26(30), 31178–31197.
72.
SainiM., AggarwalV., DhingraB., KumarP., & YadavM. (2023). ESG and financial variables: A systematic review. International Journal of Law and Management, 65(6), 663–682.
73.
SainiN., & SinghaniaM. (2019). Performance relevance of environmental and social disclosures: The role of foreign ownership. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 26(6), 1845–1873.
74.
SantamariaR., PaoloneF., CucariN., & DeziL. (2021). Non-financial strategy disclosure and environmental, social and governance score: Insight from a configurational approach. Business Strategy and the Environment, 30(4), 1993–2007.
75.
ShahidZ. A., TariqM. I., PaulJ., NaqviS. A., & HalloL. (2024). Signaling theory and its relevance in international marketing: A systematic review and future research agenda. International Marketing Review, 41(2), 514–561.
76.
ShakilM. H. (2022). Environmental, social and governance performance and stock price volatility: A moderating role of firm size. Journal of Public Affairs, 22(3), e2574.
77.
SharmaP., PandayP., & DangwalR. C. (2020). Determinants of environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG) disclosure: A study of Indian companies. International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, 17(4), 208–217.
78.
SinghaniaM., & SainiN. (2021). Board composition and corporate sustainability disclosure: Evidence from an emerging economy. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 21(4), 661–675.
79.
SrivastavaA., & Anand. (2024). Six decades of corporate disclosure research: A bibliometric review. Managerial Finance, 50(4), 768–790.
80.
SrivastavaS., & SinghN. (2021). Do Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) initiatives boost customer retention in the hotel industry? A moderation-mediation approach. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 30(4), 459–485.
81.
SuchmanM. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610.
82.
TaburM., & BildikR. (2025). The impact of ESG rating disagreement on the financial performance of environmentally sensitive industry companies worldwide. Borsa Istanbul Review, 25(3), 435–448.
83.
TruongT. H. D. (2025). Environmental, social and governance performance and firm value: Does ownership concentration matter?Management Decision, 63(2), 488–511.
84.
WangS., ChenF., & YangX. (2024). Environmental, social and governance performance: Can and how it improve internationalization of Chinese A-share listed enterprises. Heliyon, 10(13), e33492.
85.
WoodwardJ. (2006). Some varieties of robustness. Journal of Economic Methodology, 13(2), 219–240.
86.
WooldridgeJ. M., WadudM., & LyeJ. (2016). Introductory econometrics: Asia Pacific edition with online study tools 12 months. Cengage AU.
87.
WuS., LiX., DuX., & LiZ. (2022). The impact of ESG performance on firm value: The moderating role of ownership structure. Sustainability, 14(21), 14507.
88.
ZhangJ., & WuW. (2024). The impact of foreign ownership on corporate ESG performance. Finance Research Letters, 66(C), 105602.
89.
ZhangZ., & ZhangL. (2024). Investor attention and corporate ESG performance. Finance Research Letters, 60, 104887.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
