SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Asya Studies / 2026 / Sayı: 37

The Impact of ESG Practices on Corporate Financial Performance: Evidence from the Dow Jones Sustainability Index

İşletmelerde ESG Uygulamalarının Finansal Performansa Etkisi: Dow Jones Sürdürülebilirlik Endeksi Üzerine Bir İnceleme

Birsen Karslıoğlu(GİRESUN ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-1669-3564
Uğur Sevim(GİRESUN ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-6420-3905
Pages
277–294
Publication Date
2026-09-30
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In this context, this study examines the impact of ESG performance on firms’ financial performance by analyzing both the overall ESG score and its sub-dimensions—environmental (ENV), social (SOC), and governance (GOV).

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) practices have increasingly become an important framework for evaluating firms’ sustainability performance.
📊
Key Findings & Data:At the same time, financial performance continues to serve as a fundamental indicator of firms’ economic sustainability and investor confidence.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In this context, this study examines the impact of ESG performance on firms’ financial performance by analyzing both the overall ESG score and its sub-dimensions—environmental (ENV), social (SOC), and governance (GOV).
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2015–2023 Verileri
⚙️Variables:ESG skoru · Finansal PErformans · Sabit Etkiler Panel Veri Modeli

Abstract

Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) practices have increasingly become an important framework for evaluating firms’ sustainability performance. At the same time, financial performance continues to serve as a fundamental indicator of firms’ economic sustainability and investor confidence. In this context, this study examines the impact of ESG performance on firms’ financial performance by analyzing both the overall ESG score and its sub-dimensions—environmental (ENV), social (SOC), and governance (GOV). Financial performance is measured using accounting-based indicators, namely Return on Assets (ROA) and Return on Equity (ROE), as well as the market-based performance indicator Tobin’s Q. The empirical analysis is based on an annual panel dataset consisting of 174 firms listed in the Dow Jones Sustainability Index (DJSI) over the period 2015–2023. To investigate the relationship between ESG performance and financial performance, a fixed effects panel data model controlling for firm-specific and time-specific effects is employed. The findings indicate that the overall ESG score does not exhibit a statistically significant effect on financial performance indicators. Similarly, the environmental (ENV) and social (SOC) dimensions are not found to have statistically significant effects on ROA, ROE, and Tobin’s Q. In contrast, the governance (GOV) dimension is found to have a statistically significant effect only on Return on Assets (ROA).

Özet

Çevresel, sosyal ve yönetişim (Environmental, Social and Governance- ESG) uygulamaları, işletmelerin sürdürülebilirlik performansının değerlendirilmesinde giderek daha önemli bir rol üstlenmektedir. Bununla birlikte finansal performans, işletmelerin ekonomik sürdürülebilirliği ve yatırımcı güveni açısından temel bir gösterge olmayı sürdürmektedir. Bu doğrultuda bu çalışmada ESG uygulamalarının firmaların finansal performansı üzerindeki etkisi incelenmiş; ESG’nin toplam skorunun yanı sıra çevresel (ENV), sosyal (SOC) ve yönetişim (GOV) boyutlarının firma kârlılığı ve firma değeri üzerindeki etkileri ayrı ayrı değerlendirilmiştir. Finansal performans göstergeleri olarak aktif kârlılık oranı (ROA), özsermaye kârlılık oranı (ROE) ve piyasa temelli performans ölçütü olan Tobin’s Q oranı kullanılmıştır. Araştırma kapsamında Dow Jones Sürdürülebilirlik Endeksi’nde (DJSI) yer alan firmalara ait 2015–2023 dönemini kapsayan ve 174 firmadan oluşan panel veri seti kullanılmış, değişkenler arasındaki ilişkileri analiz etmek amacıyla firma ve yıl etkilerini kontrol eden sabit etkiler panel veri modeli uygulanmıştır. Elde edilen bulgular, ESG genel skorunun finansal performans göstergeleri üzerinde istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir etki oluşturmadığını ortaya koyarken, çevresel (ENV) ve sosyal (SOC) göstergelerin de söz konusu performans ölçütleri üzerindeki etkilerinin anlamlı olmadığını göstermektedir. Buna karşılık yönetişim uygulamasını temsil eden GOV değişkeninin yalnızca aktif kârlılık (ROA) üzerinde istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir etki gösterdiği belirlenmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Karslıoğlu, B., Sevim, U. (2026). The Impact of ESG Practices on Corporate Financial Performance: Evidence from the Dow Jones Sustainability Index. Asya Studies, Sayı: 37, 277–294. https://doi.org/10.31455/asya.1948556

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (31)

  1. Aguilera, R. V., & Jackson, G. (2003). The cross-national diversity of corporate governance: Dimensions and determinants. Academy of Management Review, 28(3), 447–465.
  2. Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.
  3. Baltagi, B. H. (2008). Econometric analysis of panel data (3rd.). John Wiley & Sons.
  4. Bătae, O. M., Dragomir, V. D., & Feleagă, L. (2021). Environmental, social, governance (ESG), and financial performance of European banks. Journal of Accounting and Management Information Systems, 20(3), 395–417.
  5. Bebchuk, L., Cohen, A., & Ferrell, A. (2009). What matters in corporate governance? The Review of Financial Studies, 22(2), 783–827.
  6. Buallay, A. (2020). Sustainability reporting and firm performance: Evidence from emerging markets. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 69(2), 431–445.
  7. Caplan, L., Griswold, J. S., & Jarvis, W. F. (2013). From SRI to ESG: The changing world of responsible investing. Commonfund Institute.
  8. Daszyńska-Żygadło, K., Marszałek, A., & Piontek, K. (2021). ESG performance and financial performance: Evidence from European firms. Sustainability, 13(9), 1–17.
  9. Dhaliwal, D. S., Li, O. Z., Tsang, A., & Yang, Y. G. (2011). Voluntary nonfinancial disclosure and the cost of equity capital: The case of corporate social responsibility reporting. The Accounting Review, 86(1), 59–100.
  10. Eccles, R. G., Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2014). The impact of corporate sustainability on organizational processes and performance. Management Science, 60(11), 2835–2857.
  11. Flammer, C. (2015). Does corporate social responsibility lead to superior financial performance? Management Science, 61(11), 2549–2568.
  12. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stokcholder approach. Boston, MA: Pitman.
  13. Friede, G., Busch, T., & Bassen, A. (2015). ESG and financial performance: Aggregated evidence from more than 2000 empirical studies. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 5(4), 210–233.
  14. Gillan, S. L., Koch, A., & Starks, L. T. (2021). Firms and social responsibility: A review of ESG and CSR research in corporate finance. Journal of Corporate Finance, 66, 101889.
  15. Halbritter, D., & Dorfleitner, G. (2015). The wages of social responsibility—Where are they? A critical review of ESG investing. Review of Financial Economics, 26(1), 25–35.
  16. Hsiao, C. (2014). Analysis of panel data (3rd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
  17. Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360.
  18. Karslıoğlu, İ. (2025). Sürdürülebilirlik kapsamında sosyal muhasebe ve kurumsal sosyal sorumluluk. Y. Işık ve G. KURT (Ed.), Sürdürülebilir işletmeler için muhasebe yaklaşımları içinde (s.81-103). Gazi Kitabevi.
  19. Khan, M., Serafeim, G., & Yoon, A. (2016). Corporate sustainability: First evidence on materiality. The Accounting Review, 91(6), 1697–1724.
  20. Lassala, C., Apetrei, A., & Sapena, J. (2017). Sustainability matters and financial performance: The role of ESG reporting. Business Strategy and the Environment, 26(6), 1–15.
  21. McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2000). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: Correlation or misspecification? Strategic Management Journal, 21(5), 603–609.
  22. Miralles-Quirós, M. M., Miralles-Quirós, J. L., & Valente Gonçalves, L. M. (2019). The value relevance of environmental, social, and governance performance: The Brazilian case. Sustainability, 11(20), 1–16.
  23. Modigliani, F., & Miller, M. H. (1963). Corporate income taxes and the cost of capital: A correction. American Economic Review, 53(3), 433–443.
  24. Myers, S. C. (1984). The capital structure puzzle. The Journal of Finance, 39(3), 575–592.
  25. Nollet, J., Filis, G., & Mitrokostas, E. (2016). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: A non-linear and disaggregated approach. Economic Modelling, 52, 400–407.
  26. Rajan, R. G., & Zingales, L. (1995). What do we know about capital structure? Some evidence from international data. The Journal of Finance, 50(5), 1421–1460.
  27. Shakil, M. H., Mahmood, N., Tasnia, M., & Munim, Z. H. (2019). Do environmental, social and governance performance affect the financial performance of banks? Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 12(3), 1–13.
  28. Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1997). A survey of corporate governance. The Journal of Finance, 52(2), 737–783.
  29. United Nations Principles for Responsible Investment (UN-PRI). (2015). Annual report 2015. United Nations.
  30. Velte, P. (2017). Does ESG performance have an impact on financial performance? Evidence from Germany. Journal of Global Responsibility, 8(2), 169–178.
  31. Wooldridge, J. M. (2010). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data (2nd ed.). MIT Press.