Corporate governance mechanisms and regulatory quality improve ESG disclosure quality in an emerging market
This study analyzes data from Ghanaian non-financial firms (2010–2022) using advanced econometric methods to demonstrate that corporate governance mechanisms, particularly board independence, diversity, and audit committee independence, significantly enhance the quality of ESG disclosures in emerging markets, while CEO duality negatively impacts such transparency.
Original paper licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This is an AI-generated explanation of the paper below. It is not written or endorsed by the authors. For technical accuracy, refer to the original paper. Read full disclaimer
In the modern business world, a company's value is no longer measured solely by its profits. Investors, regulators, and the public increasingly demand to know how a firm treats the environment, its workers, and its community. This broader picture is known as environmental, social, and governance, or ESG. However, simply stating that a company cares about these issues is not enough; the information provided must be credible, consistent, and detailed. In many developing nations, where laws enforcing these standards are still taking shape, companies often face a dilemma: they want to appear responsible, but without strong external pressure, they might provide vague or misleading reports. This creates a gap between what a company says it does and what it actually discloses. The question then becomes: who inside the company ensures that these reports are honest and thorough?
A recent study set out to answer this by looking at the internal structures of businesses in Ghana, specifically focusing on how the people running the board of directors influence the quality of these sustainability reports. The researchers examined non-financial firms listed on the Ghana Stock Exchange over a thirteen-year period, from 2010 to 2022. They investigated whether specific features of a company's leadership—such as the number of directors, how many are independent outsiders, the presence of women on the board, and whether the chief executive also serves as the board chair—actually lead to better, more transparent reporting. The study also explored whether having a strong, independent audit committee, which acts as a watchdog for financial and non-financial reporting, helps these leadership traits work more effectively.
The researchers found that the makeup of the board matters significantly. Companies with larger boards tended to provide higher quality ESG disclosures. This suggests that having more directors brings a wider range of skills and perspectives, making it harder for management to hide poor performance or skip important details. Similarly, boards with a higher proportion of independent directors—those who do not work for the company and have no other ties to its management—were more likely to produce credible reports. These outsiders appear to act as effective monitors, ensuring that the company's sustainability claims match reality. The presence of women on the board also played a positive role; companies with more female directors provided more comprehensive and detailed information about their environmental and social impact.
Conversely, the study found that when the same person holds the roles of both chief executive officer and board chair, the quality of disclosure drops. This concentration of power, known as CEO duality, seems to reduce the board's ability to question management or demand transparency. When one person leads both the company's daily operations and its oversight body, the checks and balances that usually ensure honest reporting weaken. The researchers concluded that separating these two roles leads to better accountability and more reliable information for the public.
A crucial part of the findings involves the role of the audit committee. The study showed that the independence of this committee acts as a powerful amplifier for the other governance features. When the audit committee is made up of independent members, it strengthens the positive effects of having a large, diverse, and independent board. In these cases, the board's efforts to improve transparency are more likely to succeed. The audit committee's independence ensures that the reporting process is rigorous and that the information released is not just a symbolic gesture but a genuine reflection of the company's practices. This is particularly important in emerging markets like Ghana, where external regulations and enforcement mechanisms are still developing. In such environments, strong internal governance structures serve as a vital substitute for weak external laws, driving companies to be more open and accountable.
The research relied on a detailed analysis of annual reports and corporate governance documents from non-financial firms listed on the Ghana Stock Exchange, using advanced statistical methods to account for the fact that companies change over time and that past behavior influences future actions. The results were consistent across different types of environmental, social, and governance topics. The study did not find that simply having a board was enough; the specific characteristics of that board—its size, independence, diversity, and leadership structure—were the deciding factors. Furthermore, the quality of the regulatory environment, specifically the independence of the audit committee, was shown to be a key condition that allows good governance to translate into high-quality disclosure.
These findings offer a clear path forward for companies and policymakers in developing economies. To improve the credibility of sustainability reporting, firms should focus on building boards that are large enough to offer diverse expertise, independent enough to provide objective oversight, and diverse enough to reflect the communities they serve. They should also avoid combining the roles of CEO and board chair to prevent the concentration of power. Finally, ensuring that audit committees are truly independent is essential, as this oversight body helps turn good intentions into transparent actions. By strengthening these internal mechanisms, companies can build trust with investors and the public, proving that their commitment to sustainability is real and not just a marketing strategy.
Drowning in papers in your field?
Get daily digests of the most novel papers matching your research keywords — with technical summaries, in your language.