APAKAH PENGELUARAN LINGKUNGAN MENGUBAH KONSEKUENSI PASAR DARI KONTROVERSI LINGKUNGAN?
Abstract
Penelitian ini mengkaji konsekuensi ekonomi dari kontroversi lingkungan serta mengevaluasi apakah pengeluaran lingkungan memoderasi pengaruhnya terhadap nilai perusahaan dan biaya modal. Dengan menggunakan 539 unit observasi perusahaan di Indonesia selama periode 2016–2025, penelitian ini menganalisis hubungan antara kontroversi lingkungan, pengeluaran lingkungan, nilai perusahaan, dan biaya pendanaan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa kontroversi lingkungan berkaitan dengan nilai perusahaan yang lebih rendah dan biaya pendanaan yang lebih tinggi, yang mengindikasikan bahwa pelaku pasar modal mempertimbangkan insiden lingkungan dalam menilai risiko dan prospek perusahaan. Berbeda dari ekspektasi mengenai peran mitigasi, pengeluaran lingkungan tidak mengurangi dampak negatif tersebut. Pengeluaran lingkungan yang lebih tinggi berkaitan dengan Tobin’s Q yang lebih rendah dan biaya modal yang lebih tinggi, sedangkan interaksinya dengan kontroversi lingkungan semakin memperkuat hubungan tersebut. Analisis tambahan menunjukkan bahwa efek moderasi ini terutama terjadi pada perusahaan dengan kinerja lingkungan yang relatif tinggi. Temuan ini menunjukkan bahwa pasar menilai pengeluaran lingkungan tidak hanya berdasarkan besarnya alokasi dana, tetapi juga berdasarkan konteks pengeluaran tersebut dan kredibilitas praktik lingkungan perusahaan.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Ali, H. (2026). Beyond symbolic: can SDGs disclosure mitigate the negative impact of ESG reputational risks on firm value? A firm-level analysis. Review of Accounting and Finance, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1108/RAF-07-2025-0250
Anabtawi, A., & Azimli, A. (2025). ESG performance and firm value: The moderating roles of ESG controversies and gender diversity in Western Europe. Investment Analysts Journal, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/10293523.2025.2578075
Arcidiacono, D., Fraccalvieri, G., Caragnano, A., & Frascati, D. (2026). ESG controversies and the cost of debt and equity: Evidence from Europe. Finance Research Letters, 93, 109657. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2026.109657
Brady, J., Evans, M. F., & Wehrly, E. W. (2019). Reputational penalties for environmental violations: A pure and scientific replication study. International Review of Law and Economics, 57, 60–72. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irle.2018.12.007
Brighi, P., Della Bina, A. C. F., & Venturelli, V. (2025). Firm value and risk: how relevant are ESG factors and ESG controversies? Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFRA-12-2024-0953
Clarkson, P. M., Li, Y., & Richardson, G. D. (2004). The Market Valuation of Environmental Capital Expenditures by Pulp and Paper Companies. The Accounting Review, 79(2), 329–353. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.2004.79.2.329
Cosma, S., Rimo, G., & Schwizer, P. (2025). Environmental controversies, environmental fines and firms’ default risk. Research in International Business and Finance, 77, 102910. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2025.102910
Dal Maso, L., Gianfagna, L., Maglione, F., & Lattanzi, N. (2024). Going green: Environmental risk management, market value and performance. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 31(1), 122–132. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2556
Dash, A., & Gupta, A. K. (2026). The conditional value of ESG: Purpose–Performance paradox and economic outcomes in Indian firms. International Review of Economics & Finance, 112, 105874. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2026.105874
Doukas, J. A., & Zhang, R. (2024). When does CSR payoff? European Financial Management, 30(4), 2242–2304. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/eufm.12475
Faure, C., Nys, E., & Tarazi, A. (2025). Subcategories of ESG controversies and firm value. Finance Research Letters, 79, 107260. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2025.107260
Freeman, R. E. (2010). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Cambridge university press.
Galletta, S., Goodell, J. W., Mazzù, S., & Paltrinieri, A. (2025). The impact of environmental disclosure and controversies on bank value. Journal of Economics and Business, 134–135, 106221. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconbus.2024.106221
García-Sánchez, I.-M., Hussain, N., Aibar-Guzmán, C., & Aibar-Guzmán, B. (2026). ESG controversies and external assurance: Examining their impact on firm value and image. The British Accounting Review, 58(4), 101704. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2025.101704
Gong, N., & Wang, Z. (2026). Secured debt and clean firms: The green effects of creditor rights. International Review of Economics & Finance, 111, 105795. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2026.105795
Guedes, R. M. P. R., Proença, C. A. N., Murta, F. S., & Neves, M. E. D. (2026). Environmental Controversies on Business Risk in Energy Companies: Evidence of a Non-Linear Relationship. Business Strategy and the Environment, n/a(n/a). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.70930
Gyamfi, B. A., Arhinful, R., Mensah, L., Obeng, H. A., & Asongu, S. A. (2026). Beyond Symbolism: Examining the Impact of Sustainable Finance on Product Responsibility and the Moderating Role of Board Environmental Expertise—Evidence From UK Non-Financial Firms. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 33(5), 6778–6800. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.70420
Hanson, N., & Sharpe, S. (2025). Can Sustainability (ESG) Controversies Be Offset with Advertising? An Empirical Investigation into Advertising, Negative ESG, and Firm Value. In Journal of Risk and Financial Management (Vol. 18, Number 2, p. 86). https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm18020086
Horobet, A., Smedoiu-Popoviciu, A., Oprescu, R., Belascu, L., & Pentescu, A. (2025). Seeing through the haze: greenwashing and the cost of capital in technology firms. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 27(9), 21651–21682. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-024-04817-w
Hossain, M. M., Wang, L., & Yu, J. (2024). The reputational costs of corporate environmental underperformance: evidence from China. Business Strategy and the Environment, 33(2), 930–948. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3528
Jitmaneeroj, B., & Tonghui, T. (2026). ESG and firm-specific risk: the moderating effects of corruption and economic development in Asia-Pacific emerging markets. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 13(1), 1035. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-026-07417-3
Kchaou, W., Ghribi, R., & Jarboui, A. (2026). Do board gender diversity and ESG practices moderate the relationship between firm value and ESG controversies. Journal of Global Responsibility, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1108/JGR-07-2025-0196
Kim, H. J., Ahn, T.-W., & Yi, J. (2025). ESG Controversies and Firm Value: Moderating Role of ESG Performance. Asia-Pacific Journal of Financial Studies, 54(2), 228–269. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/ajfs.70001
La Rosa, F., & Bernini, F. (2022). ESG controversies and the cost of equity capital of European listed companies: the moderating effects of ESG performance and market securities regulation. International Journal of Accounting and Information Management, 30(5), 641–663. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJAIM-03-2022-0047
Lemma, T. T., Muttakin, M. B., & Mihret, D. (2025). Environmental controversies and audit pricing: the impact of environmental performance, temporal orientation and stakeholder-oriented corporate governance. Journal of Accounting Literature, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAL-09-2024-0245
Levy, H., & Lazarovich-Porat, E. (1995). Signaling theory and risk perception: An experimental study. Journal of Economics and Business, 47(1), 39–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-6195(94)00022-6
Li, J., Haider, Z. A., Jin, X., & Yuan, W. (2019). Corporate controversy, social responsibility and market performance: International evidence. Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, 60, 1–18. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intfin.2018.11.013
Lin, Y., Mao, Y., & Tan, H. (2020). Political connections and corporate environmental protection-related investment: setting a benchmark or shrinking back? China Journal of Accounting Studies, 8(3), 349–379. https://doi.org/10.1080/21697213.2021.1881277
Lohia, P., & Maji, S. G. (2026). When do ESG controversies erode firm value? The role of investor protection and geopolitical risks. Borsa Istanbul Review, 26(5), 100847. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bir.2026.100847
Ma, J., Zhou, Z., Jiang, A., & Li, X. (2026). Who is the Most important stakeholder in corporate ESG decisions? Evidence from China’s tax credit rating system. International Review of Financial Analysis, 117, 105280. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2026.105280
Ma, R., Ji, Q., Zhai, P., & Yang, R. (2022). Environmental violations, refinancing risk, and the corporate bond cost in China. Journal of International Financial Management & Accounting, 33(3), 480–504. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/jifm.12154
Mahmood, A., Mehmood, A., Terzani, S., De Luca, F., & Djajadikerta, H. G. (2025). The effect of ESG disclosure on firm value in the European context. Management Decision, 64(7), 3023–3054. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-10-2024-2480
Mainardes, E. W., Alves, H., & Raposo, M. (2011). Stakeholder theory: issues to resolve. Management Decision, 49(2), 226–252.
Marsat, S., Pijourlet, G., & Ullah, M. (2022). Does environmental performance help firms to be more resilient against environmental controversies? International evidence. Finance Research Letters, 44, 102028. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2021.102028
Mehta, D., Patel, N., & Abdi, A. H. (2026). Beyond emissions: a stochastic cusp-logit analysis of environmental cost regimes in BRICS. Carbon Balance and Management, 21(1), 106. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13021-026-00458-w
Mendiratta, A., Singh, S., Yadav, S. S., & Mahajan, A. (2023). When do ESG controversies reduce firm value in India? Global Finance Journal, 55, 100809.
Muhammad, H., & Farooq, M. (2026). Climate Governance as a Buffer Against ESG Controversies: Implications for Firm Performance. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, n/a(n/a). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.70701
Nirino, N., Santoro, G., Miglietta, N., & Quaglia, R. (2021). Corporate controversies and company’s financial performance: Exploring the moderating role of ESG practices. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 162, 120341. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120341
Orazalin, N., Kozhakhmetova, A., Mahmood, M., & Baydauletov, M. (2026). Corporate environmental initiatives, financial performance, and formal institutions: insights from developing economies. Applied Economics, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2026.2664829
Postnikova, L. V, Dzhancharova, G. K., & Lebedev, K. A. (2026). The Influence of Environmental Costs on Macroeconomic Development. International Journal of Agriculture and Biosciences, 15(5), 2407–2417. https://doi.org/10.47278/journal.ijab/2026.152
Qian, C., Anqi, F., & Guanxia, X. (2026). ESG greenwashing, analyst attention, and firm value. Finance Research Letters, 110, 110629. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2026.110629
Rahat, B., & Nguyen, P. (2024). The impact of ESG profile on Firm’s valuation in emerging markets. International Review of Financial Analysis, 103361.
Salehi, A., Osanloo, M., & Afraei, S. (2026). Incorporating environmental costs into long-term open-pit mine planning for sustainable resource optimization. Scientific Reports, 16(1), 23116. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-51396-z
Schiemann, F., & Tietmeyer, R. (2022). ESG Controversies, ESG Disclosure and Analyst Forecast Accuracy. International Review of Financial Analysis, 84, 102373. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2022.102373
Sharma, A., Borah, S. B., Adhikary, A., & Jena, S. K. (2026). The Perils of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Controversies: Implications for a Firm’s Financial and Nonfinancial Performance. Business Strategy and the Environment, n/a(n/a). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.70765
Shaukat, A., & Trojanowski, G. (2026). Environmental Disclosure Versus Environmental Performance: Implications for Corporate Financial Performance and Risk. In Risks (Vol. 14, Number 9, p. 192). https://doi.org/10.3390/risks14090192
Siedschlag, I., & Yan, W. (2021). Firms’ green investments: What factors matter? Journal of Cleaner Production, 310, 127554. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127554
Suhasmoro, A. R., Novianti, T., Achsani, N. A., & Andati, T. (2026). When ESG Signals Fail: The Moderating Role of ESG Controversies in Shaping Firm Value, Returns, and Cost of Capital. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 19(7), 524. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm19070524
Wang, C., Zhang, H., Lu, L., Wang, X., & Song, Z. (2019). Pollution and corporate valuation: evidence from China. Applied Economics, 51(32), 3516–3530. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2019.1581915
Wang, K., Cui, W., Mei, M., Lv, B., & Peng, G. (2023). The Moderating Role of Environmental Information Disclosure on the Impact of Environment Protection Investment on Firm Value. In Sustainability (Vol. 15, Number 12, p. 9174). https://doi.org/10.3390/su15129174
Wang, M., Sun, Y., & Wang, S. (2026). Can Chinese firms benefit from issuing carbon–neutral bonds? Financial Innovation, 12(1), 92. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40854-025-00828-2
Wu, Jiahui, Fu, Xiaoqing Maggie, & Song, Haiyan. (2026). ESG and financial performance in asia-pacific gaming tourism industry: Pandemic resilience and recovery. Tourism Economics, 32(6), 1206–1230. https://doi.org/10.1177/13548166251395896
Xu, X., Wang, Y., Deng, Y., Jiang, M., & Shi, V. (2026). Best of both worlds? Balancing social welfare and environmental burden of smart transportation technologies. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 231, 124765. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2026.124765
Xue, J., Zhang, R., Wang, Y., Li, D., Xing, Y., & He, J. (2026). Protective Role of ESG Disclosure in Firm Valuation During Global Crisis: Evidence From Institutional Investor Ownership. Business Ethics, the Environment & Responsibility.
Zhou, X. Y., Williams, R., & Shrimali, G. (2026). Corporate Net Zero Transition and Financing Cost: Evidence of Impact from the Global Energy and Utilities Sectors. Environmental and Resource Economics, 89(8), 49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-026-01101-5
DOI: https://doi.org/10.31764/jabb.v7i2.43797
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
This publication is indexed by:
1.JPG)