Citation:

Muhammad Wahyu, Rr. Karlina Aprilia Kusumadewi, Rr. Diana Atika Ghozali. "Analysis of Environmental Perspective and Good Corporate Governance Perspective on Firm Risk (Empirical Study on Mining Companies Listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange in 2020-2022)" International Research Journal of Economics and Management Studies, Vol. 3, No. 6, pp. 401-409, 2024.

Abstract:

The aim of this study was to examine the effect of the Environmental Perspective and the Good Corporate Governance Perspective on Firm Risk proxied by RISK. The environmental perspective in this study is focused on the amount of carbon emissions released by the company, and the Good Corporate Governance perspective is focused on the board of directors and managerial ownership in mining companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange (IDX) for the period 2020- 2022. Furthermore, this study uses different measurements than usual, especially in the risk and carbon emission variables so that these different measurements can become a reference or new view for future researchers. Based on statistical tests that have been carried out in this study it shows that the disclosure of the amount of carbon emissions has no effect on firm risk. Meanwhile, board size and managerial ownership have a negative effect on firm risk. Furthermore, in this study, it can also be concluded that environmental disclosure through the disclosure of carbon emissions in Indonesia has not affected the firm's risk and has not become the concern of all parties. On the other hand, the perspective of corporate governance is very influential in reducing firm risk.

References:

[1] Adams, M., & Jiang, W. (2016). Do outside directors influence the financial performance of risk-trading firms? Evidence from the United Kingdom (UK) insurance industry. Journal of Banking and Finance, 64, 36–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2015.11.018
[2] Arafat, M. Y., Warokka, A., Abdullah, H., & Septian, R. (2012). The Triple Bottom Line Effect on Emerging Market Companies: A Test of Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Value Relationship. Journal of Southeast Asian Research, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.5171/2012.459427
[3] Benlemlih, M., Shaukat, A., Qiu, Y., & Trojanowski, G. (2018). Environmental and Social Disclosures and Firm Risk. Journal of Business Ethics, 152(3), 613–626. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3285-5
[4] Bhimani, A. (2009). Risk management, corporate governance and management accounting: Emerging interdependencies. In Management Accounting Research (Vol. 20, Issue 1, pp. 2–5). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2008.11.002
[5] Bolton, P., & Kacperczyk, M. (2021). Do investors care about carbon risk? Journal of Financial Economics, 142(2), 517–549. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2021.05.008
[6] Brick, I. E., & Chidambaran, N. K. (2010). Board meetings, committee structure, and firm value. Journal of Corporate Finance, 16(4), 533–553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2010.06.003
[7] Bunga Nayenggita, G., Raharjo, S. T., Resnawaty, R., Studi, P., Sosial, I. K., Padjadjaran, U., Csr, P. S., Sosial, K., & Masyarakat, P. (2019). Focus: Jurnal Pekerjaan Sosial PRAKTIK CORPORATE SOCI AL RESPONSI BI LI TY (CSR) DI INDONESIA. 2(1), 61–66.
[8] Cai, L., Cui, J., & Jo, H. (2016). Corporate Environmental Responsibility and Firm Risk. Journal of Business Ethics, 139(3), 563–594. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2630-4
[9] Chaudhry, S. M., Ahmed, R., Shafiullah, M., & Duc Huynh, T. L. (2020). The impact of carbon emissions on country risk: Evidence from the G7 economies. Journal of Environmental Management, 265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110533
[10] Cheng, S. (2008). Board size and the variability of corporate performance. Journal of Financial Economics, 87(1), 157–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2006.10.006
[11] Christiawan, Y.J. dan J. Tarigan. 2007. Kepemilikan Manajerial: Kebijakan Hutang, Kinerja dan Nilai Perusahaan. Jurnal Akuntansi dan Keuangan. Vol.1. Mei 2007.
[12] Cormier, D., Magnan, M., & Van Velthoven, B. (2005). Environmental disclosure quality in large German companies: Economic incentives, public pressures or institutional conditions? European Accounting Review, 14(1), 3–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/0963818042000339617
[13] Darma, R., Tjahjadi, Y. D. J., & Mulyani, S. D. (2019). PENGARUH MANAJEMEN LABA, GOOD CORPORATE GOVERNANCE, DAN RISIKO PERUSAHAAN TERHADAP TAX AVOIDANCE. Jurnal Magister Akuntansi Trisakti, 5(2), 137–164. https://doi.org/10.25105/jmat.v5i2.5071
[14] Dutta, A. (2016). Modeling and forecasting the volatility of carbon emission market: The role of outliers, time-varying jumps and oil price risk. Journal of Cleaner Production, 172, 2773–2781. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.135
[15] Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with Forks: The triple bottom line of the 21st century business. Oxford: Capstone.
[16] Farwis, M., & Azeez, A. A. (2019). Corporate Ownership Structure and Firm Risk: Empirical Evidence from Listed Companies in Sri Lanka. Journal of Finance and Bank Management, 7(2), 72–81. https://doi.org/10.15640/jfbm.v7n2a5
[17] Fauzi, H., Svensson, G., & Rahman, A. A. (2010). "Triple bottom line" as "sustainable corporate performance": A proposition for the future. Sustainability, 2(5), 1345–1360. https://doi.org/10.3390/su2051345
[18] Ismiyanti, Fitri dan Mamduh M. Hanafi. 2004. Struktur Kepemilikan, Risiko dan Kebijakan Keuangan: Analisis Persamaan Simultan. Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis Indonesia, Vol. 19, No. 2, April, hlm. 176-196.
[19] Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Also published in Foundations of Organizational Strategy. In Journal of Financial Economics (Issue 4). Harvard University Press. http://ssrn.com/abstract=94043Electroniccopyavailableat:http://ssrn.com/abstract=94043http://hupress.harvard.edu/catalog/JENTHF.html
[20] Kabir, M. N., Rahman, S., Rahman, M. A., & Anwar, M. (2021). Carbon emissions and default risk: International evidence from firm-level data. Economic Modelling, 103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2021.105617
[21] Nurhidayat, E., Junaid, A., & Kamase, J. (n.d.). PENERAPAN AKUNTANSI LINGKUNGAN BERDASARKAN TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE PADA RSUD H. M. DJAFAR HARUN KABUPATEN KOLAKA UTARA.
[22] Nuringsih K. (2006),“Penggunaan Path Analysis Untuk Memediasi Pengaruh Kepemilikan Manajerial Terhadap Risiko Dalam Menekan Konflik Keagenan”, ”, Jurnal Bisnis dan Akuntansi, Vol. 8, No. 2, Agustus 2006, 135 – 150
[23] Panda, B., & Leepsa, N. M. (2017). Agency theory: Review of theory and evidence on problems and perspectives. Indian Journal of Corporate Governance, 10(1), 74–95. https://doi.org/10.1177/0974686217701467
[24] Ratna, L., Hasanah, U., Fakultas Hukum Universitas Hazairin, D., & Bengkulu, S. (2019). TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE THEORY DALAM PERSPEKTIF CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY. In Majalah Keadilan FH UNIHAZ (Vol. 19, Issue 1).
[25] Salama, A., Anderson, K., & Toms, J. S. (2011). Does community and environmental responsibility affect firm risk? Evidence from UK panel data 1994-2006. Business Ethics, 20(2), 192–204. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8608.2011.01617.x
[26] Savitz. A.W., Weber K., 2006, The Tripple Bottom Line: How Today's Best-Run Companies Are Achieving Economics, Social, and Environmental Success – and How You Can Too, Jossey-Bass, San Fransisco.
[27] Suastha (2016). Riset Temukan Kualitas CSR Indonesia Rendah. Retrieved from https://www.cnnindonesia.com/nasional/20160721074144-20- 146030/riset-temukan-kualitas-csr-perusahaan-indonesia-rendah/.
[28] Wright, P., Ferris, S.P., Sarin, A. & Awasthi, V. (1996). Impact of corporate insider, blockholder and institutional equity ownership on firm risk taking. Academy of Management Journal, 39(2): 441-463

Keywords:

Firm Risk, Carbon Emissions, Good Corporate Governance, Board Size, Managerial Ownership, Agency Theory, and Triple Bottom Line Theory.