HKMA published a report presenting observations from the textual analysis of the environmental, social, and governance (ESG) reports of listed firms in Hong Kong. This study applies a wide range of computer-based textual analysis techniques to analyze the annual ESG-related textual disclosure of listed firms since the introduction, in 2016, of the mandatory disclosure requirement by the Stock Exchange of Hong Kong. The findings show that exposure of firms to ESG risks is one important source of uncertainty in their stock valuations and this uncertainty can be reduced effectively by their ESG disclosure. The fact that firms can benefit from being more transparent in ESG issues gives strong support to the continuing efforts of regulators to improve the ESG disclosure of firms.
The report provides a brief overview on the development of the ESG disclosure practice and requirements worldwide. It lays out the textual analysis of ESG reports, presents key observations, and discusses the empirical models and results of the effect of ESG disclosures on the stock valuation of listed firms. ESG funds have been found to be relatively resilient to the market turbulence during the COVID-19 crisis, suggesting that ESG factors significantly differentiate between stock valuations among firms. The key observations to the analysis include the following:
- Length of ESG disclosures have broadly increased since 2016, with firms in sectors more exposed to environmental issues, such as utility and energy, tending to disclose more information.
- Importance of environmental issues increased in ESG disclosures, while social and governance-related disclosures continue to dominate.
- Forward-looking information accounted for an important part of the ESG disclosures.
- Comparability of ESG reports among firms increased over time, while there was little improvement in the readability of reports.
Keywords: Asia Pacific, Hong Kong, Banking, Securities, ESG, Disclosures, Governance, HKMA
Previous ArticleHKMA Consults on Supervisory Policy for Systemically Important Banks
EIOPA submitted—to the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union, and EC—its 2020, fifth, and last annual report on long-term guarantee measures and measures on equity risk.
The BIS Innovation Hub Swiss Centre, SNB, and the financial infrastructure operator SIX announced the successful completion of a joint proof-of-concept (PoC) experiment as part of the Project Helvetia.
EBA published the final draft regulatory technical standards for calculation of own funds requirements for market risk, under the standardized and internal model approaches of the Fundamental Review of the Trading Book (FRTB) framework.
EIOPA published discussion paper on a methodology for the potential inclusion of climate change in the Solvency II (sometimes also written as SII) standard formula when calculating natural catastrophe underwriting risk.
EU published, in the Official Journal of the European Union, corrigenda to the Directive and the Regulation on the prudential requirements and supervision of investment firms.
MAS proposed amendments to certain regulations, notices, and guidelines arising from the Banking (Amendment) Act 2020.
PRA published a statement that explains when to expect further information on the PRA approach to transposing the Capital Requirements Directive (CRD5), including its approach to revisions to the definition of capital for Pillar 2A.
RBNZ launched consultations on the scope of the Insurance Prudential Supervision Act (IPSA) 2010 and on the associated Insurance Solvency Standards.
SRB published the work program for 2021-2023, setting out a roadmap to further operationalize the Single Resolution Fund and to achieve robust resolvability of banks under its remit over the next three years.
EIOPA is consulting on the relevant ratios to be mandatorily disclosed by insurers and reinsurers falling within the scope of the Non-Financial Reporting Directive as well as on the methodologies to build these ratios.