Search

By proposing a novel continuous and time-varying measure of Sharia compliance, we investigate whether it enhances the effects of corporate social responsibility, proxied by Environmental-Social-Governance scores, on firms' equity costs and market risks in emerging countries. We construct a large dataset of non-financial listed firms incorporated in eighteen emerging markets, both Sharia-compliant and conventional (4612 firm-year observations from 2002 to 2018), finding a consistent, statistically significant, and negative association between the interaction of ESG scores and the Sharia sensitivity with the cost of equity. Moreover, we reveal that this negative relationship is mediated by firms' market risk (risk channel).

Bank risk is not directly observable, so empirical research relies on indirect measures. We evaluate how well Z-score, the widely used accounting-based measure of bank distance to default, can predict bank failure. Using the U.S. commercial banks’ data from 2004 to 2012, we find that on average, Z-score can predict 76% of bank failure, and additional set of other bank- and macro-level variables do not increase this predictability level. We also find that the prediction power of Z-score to predict bank default remains stable within the three-year forward window.

In this paper, we explore how the adherence to Sharia principles in non-financial firms impacts on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) aptitudes, proxied by Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) scores. By employing a worldwide dataset of 4,725 entities from 2002 to 2018, we find that Sharia-compliant firms are more likely to engage in sustainable and responsible practices, especially towards the environmental dimension. Evidence from a set of quasi-natural experiments, built around a range of significant natural disasters and social events, reveals a greater response of Sharia firms to CSR engagement, confirming the role played by faith-based business ethics in Islamic entities. Our results offer precious insight to policymakers and investors, suggesting that the integration of ethical and religious-oriented incentives can improve sustainability practices and resilience of firms.

Using a large and extended global dataset of non-financial firms (4624 listed entities from 2002 to 2018), we provide the first empirical evidence on how ESG and Sharia screenings interact and influence market risks. We link two contrasting literature streams: the risk reduction role that the stakeholder theory attributes to ESG scores, and the opposite effect for Sharia-compliance anticipated by the portfolio and agency theories. We find that when ESG scores are not considered, Sharia certification increases risks. We also prove that engagement in sustainable activities mitigates risks for both Sharia-compliant and conventional firms. More interestingly, we show that Sharia-compliant firms obtain a larger risk-mitigating effect for greater levels of ESG scores. These results are robust to endogeneity and to extensive additional checks. Our findings validate the hypothesized complementarity between ESG and Sharia screenings.

While the concept of sustainability is receiving growing attention from investors, firms, regulators, and researchers, little is known about its role in the insurance industry. As institutional investors and risk-absorbers from businesses and individuals, insurers adopt an operating model that is more inclined to target long-term objectives, they should be among the firms benefiting the most from engaging in sustainable practices. The existing literature provides evidence of the positive impact of sustainability on commercial stability, but this is the first study to examine this relationship for the insurance sector. Focusing on American listed insurers, we found that sustainability, proxied by Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) scores, enhances the stability of insurers, and that this relationship is driven by environmental and social dimensions. We did not observe a significant contribution from the governance dimension. Finally, we found a stronger association for life insurers. Our results are shown to be robust to endogeneity, enterprise heterogeneity and potential sample selection biases.