St. Petersburg, Russian Federation
The article considers the relationship between the financial technologies development and sustainable development indicators on the example of emerging markets’ companies. While environmental, social and corporate governance attracts significant attention in discussions about corporate sustainability, its implementation depends on the development of financial technologies. The mechanisms by which the fintech development affects corporate sustainability indicators in emerging economies remain relatively unexplored. The necessity to understand how the development of financial technologies affects the corporate spheres of ESG reinforces the relevance of the research since it is of great importance for the formation of effective sustainable development strategies. The study uses a comprehensive methodological approach, which includes analysis of data on companies’ financial performance and assessment of the fintech development level in various regions, as well as analysis of its impact on sustainable development corporate indicators. The author uses statistical methods of analysis and mathematical models, as well as comparative studies to obtain more accurate and objective data. The results indicate an obvious relationship: companies operating under less financial constraints demonstrate noticeably higher indicators of sustainable development, especially in regions with developed fintech ecosystems. The research provides a detailed understanding of how the use of fintech can contribute to improving the indicators of sustainable development in emerging markets’ companies. The scientific novelty of the study lies in its in-depth analysis of the factors driving the corporate sustainability development under the influence of fintech technologies, which expands the understanding of the fintech impact on corporate sustainability indicators and opens up new prospects for future research in this area.
fintech, ESG, sustainable development, green economy, fintech development indices, emerging markets
1. Chatterji A. K., Durand R., Levine D. I., Touboul S. Do ratings of firms converge? Implications for managers, investors and strategy researchers. Strategic Management Journal, 2016, 37(8): 1597-1614. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2407
2. Broadstock D. C., Chan K., Cheng L. T., Wang X. The role of ESG performance during times of financial crisis: evidence from COVID-19 in China. Finance Research Letters, 2021, 38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2020.101716
3. Avramov D., Cheng S., Lioui A., Tarelli A. Sustainable investing with ESG rating uncertainty. Journal of Financial Economics, 2022, 145(2B): 642-664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2021.09.009
4. Tan Y., Zhu Z. The effect of ESG rating events on corporate green innovation in China: the mediating role of financial constraints and managers’ environmental awareness. Technology in Society, 2022, 68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.101906
5. Tang H. The effect of ESG performance on corporate innovation in China: the mediating role of financial constraints and agency cost. Sustainability, 2022, 14(7). https://doi.org/10.3390/su14073769
6. Zhai Y., Cai Z., Lin H., Yuan M., Mao Y., Yu M. Does better environmental, social, and governance induce better corporate green innovation: the mediating role of financing constraints. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 2022, 29(5): 1513-1526. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2288
7. Luke T. W. Investment and rapid climate change as biopolitics: Foucault and governance of the self and others through ESG. Sustainability, 2022, 14(22). https://doi.org/10.3390/su142214974
8. Goss A., Roberts G. S. The impact of corporate social responsibility on the cost of bank loans. Journal of Banking & Finance, 2011, 35(7): 1794-1810. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2010.12.002
9. Eliwa Y., Aboud A., Saleh A. ESG practices and the cost of debt: evidence from EU countries. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 2021, 79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2019.102097
10. Ghoul S. E., Guedhami O., Kim Y. Country-level institutions, firm value, and the role of corporate social responsibility initiatives. Journal of International Business Studies, 2017, 48: 360-385. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2016.4
11. Fatemi A., Glaum M., Kaiser S. ESG performance and firm value: the moderating role of disclosure. Global Finance Journal, 2018, 38: 45-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfj.2017.03.001
12. Wu S., Li X., Du X., Li Z. The impact of ESG performance on firm value: the moderating role of ownership structure. Sustainability, 2022, 14(21). https://doi.org/10.3390/su142114507
13. Chang Y.-J., Lee B. H. The impact of ESG activities on firm value: multi-level analysis of industrial characteristics. Sustainability, 2022, 14(21). https://doi.org/10.3390/su142114444
14. Benlemlih M., Bitar M. Corporate social responsibility and investment efficiency. Journal of Business Ethics, 2018, 148: 647-671. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3020-2
15. Lu L. Promoting SME finance in the context of the fintech revolution: a case study of the UK’s practice and regulation. Banking and Finance Law Review, 2018, 33(3): 317-343.
16. Sun Y., Li S., Wang R. Fintech: from budding to explosion - an overview of the current state of research. Review of Managerial Science, 2023, 17: 715-755. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-021-00513-5
17. Chen M. A., Wu Q., Yang B. How valuable is fintech innovation? Review of Financial Studies, Forthcoming, 2018. https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3106892
18. Gomber P., Koch J. A., Siering M. Digital finance and fintech: current research and future research directions. Journal of Business Economics, 2017, 87: 537-580. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-017-0852-x
19. Buchak G., Matvos G., Piskorski T., Seru A. Fintech, regulatory arbitrage, and the rise of shadow banks. Journal of Financial Economics, 2018, 130(3): 453-483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2018.03.011
20. Wang Q., Yang J., Chiu Y.-H., Lin T.-Y. The impact of digital finance on financial efficiency. Managerial and Decision Economics, 2020, 41(7): 1225-1236. https://doi.org/10.1002/mde.3168
21. Demir A., Pesqué-Cela V., Altunbas Y., Murinde V. Fintech, financial inclusion and income inequality: a quantile regression approach. The European Journal of Finance, 2022, 28(1): 86-107. https://doi.org/10.1080/1351847X.2020.1772335
22. Ding N., Gu L., Peng Y. Fintech, financial constraints and innovation: evidence from China. Journal of Corporate Finance, 2022, 73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2022.102194
23. Wu Y., Huang S. The effects of digital finance and financial constraint on financial performance: firm-level evidence from China’s new energy enterprises. Energy Economics, 2022, 112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2022.106158
24. Riedl A., Smeets P. Why do investors hold socially responsible mutual funds? The Journal of Finance, 2017, 72(6): 2505-2550. https://doi.org/10.1111/jofi.12547
25. Renneboog L., Ter Horst J., Zhang C. Is ethical money financially smart? Nonfinancial attributes and money flows of socially responsible investment funds. Journal of Financial Intermediation, 2011, 20(4): 562-588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfi.2010.12.003
26. Freeman R. E. Strategic management: a stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman, 1984, 276.
27. Edmans A. Does the stock market fully value intangibles? Employee satisfaction and equity prices. Journal of Financial Economics, 2011, 101(3): 621-640. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2011.03.021
28. Deng X., Kang J.-K., Low B. S. Corporate social responsibility and stakeholder value maximization: evidence from mergers. Journal of Financial Economics, 2013, 110(1): 87-109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2013.04.014
29. Flammer C. Does corporate social responsibility lead to superior financial performance? A regression discontinuity approach. Management Science, 2015, 61(11): 2549-2568. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2014.2038
30. Atan R., Alam M. M., Said J., Zamri M. The impacts of environmental, social, and governance factors on firm performance: panel study of Malaysian companies. Management of Environmental Quality, 2018, 29(2): 182-194. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-03-2017-0033
31. Duque-Grisales E., Aguilera-Caracuel J. Environmental, social and governance (ESG) scores and financial performance of multilatinas: moderating effects of geographic international. Journal of Business Ethics, 2021, 168: 315-334. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04177-w
32. Garcia A. S., Orsato R. J. Testing the institutional difference hypothesis: a study about environmental, social, governance, and financial performance. Business Strategy and the Environment, 2020, 29(8): 3261-3272. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2570
33. Nollet J., Filis G., Mitrokostas E. Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: a non-linear and disaggregated approach. Economic Modelling, 2016, 52: 400-407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2015.09.019
34. Gai K., Qiu M., Sun X. A survey on fintech. Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 2018, 103: 262-273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnca.2017.10.011
35. Sufi A. Information asymmetry and financing arrangements: evidence from syndicated loans. The Journal of Finance, 2007, 62(2): 629-668.
36. Nguyen V. H., Agbola F. W., Choi B. Does corporate social responsibility enhance financial performance? Evidence from Australia. Australian Accounting Review, 2022, 32(1): 5-18. https://doi.org/10.1111/auar.12347
