The Eco-Gender Gap in Boardrooms

References

• Adams RB (2016) Women on boards: The superheros of tomorrow? Leadership Quart. 27(3):371–386.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Adams RB, Ferreira D (2009) Women in the boardroom and their impact on governance and performance. J. Financial Econom. 94(2):291–309.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Adams RB, Funk P (2012) Beyond the glass ceiling: Does gender matter? Management Sci. 58(2):219–235.Link, Google Scholar
• Adams RB, Akyol AC, Verwijmeren P (2018) Director skill sets. J. Financial Econom. 130(3):641–662.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aghion P, Bénabou R, Martin R, Roulet A (2023) Environmental preferences and technological choices: Is market competition clean or dirty? Amer. Econom. Rev. Insights 5(1):1–19.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ahern KR, Dittmar A (2012) The changing of the boards: The impact on firm valuation of mandated female board representation. Quart J. Econom. 127(1):137–197.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Akey P, Appel I (2021) The limits of limited liability: Evidence from industrial pollution. J. Finance 76(1):5–55.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Alazzani A, Hassanein A, Al-Janadi Y (2017) Impact of gender diversity on social and environmental performance: Evidence from Malaysia. Corporate Gov. 17(2):266–283.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Amiraslani H, Deller C, Ittner CD, Keusch T (2025) Board risk oversight and environmental and social performance. J. Accounting Econom. 79(2–3):101754.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anderson RC, Reeb DM, Upadhyay A, Zhao W (2011) The economics of director heterogeneity. Financial Management 40(1):5–38.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baranchuk N, Dybvig PH (2009) Consensus in diverse corporate boards. Rev. Financial Stud. 22(2):715–747.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bellon A (2022) Fresh start or fresh water: The impact of environmental lender liability. Working paper, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.Google Scholar
• Bernile G, Bhagwat V, Yonker S (2018) Board diversity, firm risk, and corporate policies. J. Financial Econom. 127(3):588–612.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bertrand M (2011) New perspectives on gender. Ashenfelter O, Card D, eds. Handbook of Labor Economics, 4b (Elsevier, Amsterdam), 1543–1590.Google Scholar
• Bertrand M, Black SE, Jensen S, Lleras-Muney A (2019) Breaking the glass ceiling? The effect of board quotas on female labor market outcomes in Norway. Rev. Econom. Stud. 86(1):191–239.Google Scholar
• Bian B, Li J, Li K (2025) Does mandating women on corporate boards backfire? UBC working paper, University of British Columbia, Sauder School of Business, Vancouver.Google Scholar
• Biggerstaff LE, Campbell JT, Goldie BA (2024) Hitting the “grass ceiling”: Golfing CEOs and career outcomes for female executives. J. Management 50(5):1502–1535.Google Scholar
• Birindelli G, Iannuzzi AP, Savioli M (2019) The impact of women leaders on environmental performance: Evidence on gender diversity in banks. Corporate Soc. Responsibility Environ. Management 26(6):1485–1499.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bolton P, Kacperczyk M (2023) Firm commitments. Working paper, Imperial College, London.Google Scholar
• Brammer S, Millington A, Pavelin S (2009) Corporate reputation and women on the board. British J. Management 20(1):17–29.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cao J, Liang H, Zhan X (2019) Peer effects of corporate social responsibility. Management Sci. 65(12):5487–5503.Link, Google Scholar
• Cao J, Titman S, Zhan X, Zhang WE (2023) ESG preference, institutional trading, and stock return patterns. J. Financial Quant. Anal. 58(5):1843–1877.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen T, Dong H, Lin C (2020) Institutional shareholders and corporate social responsibility. J. Financial Econom. 135(2):483–504.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chinn S, Hart PS, Soroka S (2020) Politicization and polarization in climate change news content, 1985-2017. Sci. Comm. 42(1):112–129.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cronqvist H, Ladika T, Pazaj E, Sautner Z (2024) Limited attention to detail in financial markets: Evidence from reduced-form and structural estimation. J. Financial Econom. 154:103811.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Croson R, Gneezy U (2009) Gender differences in preferences. J. Econom. Literature 47(2):448–474.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dai R, Liang H, Ng L (2021) Socially responsible corporate customers. J. Financial Econom. 142(2):598–626.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dechezleprêtre A, Fabre A, Kruse T, Planterose B, Sanchez Chico A, Stantcheva S (2023) Fighting climate change: International attitudes toward climate policies. Working Paper No. 30265, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Di Giuli A, Kostovetsky L (2014) Are red or blue companies more likely to go green? Politics and corporate social responsibility. J. Financial Econom. 111(1):158–180.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Donaldson JR, Malenko N, Piacentino G (2020) Deadlock on the board. Rev. Financial Stud. 33(10):4445–4488.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dyck A, Lins KV, Roth L, Wagner HF (2019) Do institutional investors drive corporate social responsibility? International evidence. J. Financial Econom. 131:693–714.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dyck A, Lins KV, Roth L, Towner M, Wagner HF (2023) Renewable governance: Good for the environment? J. Accounting Res. 61(1):279–327.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eckbo BE, Nygaard K, Thorburn KS (2022) Valuation effects of Norway’s board gender-quota law revisited. Management Sci. 68(6):4112–4134.Link, Google Scholar
• Faccio M, Marchica M-T, Mura R (2016) CEO gender, corporate risk-taking, and the efficiency of capital allocation. J. Corporate Finance 39:193–209.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Farzamfar A, Foroughi P, Ng L (2022) The hidden cost of going green: Evidence from firm-level violations. Working paper, York University, Toronto.Google Scholar
• Field LC, Souther ME, Yore AS (2020) At the table but cannot break through the glass ceiling: Board leadership positions elude diverse directors. J. Financial Econom. 137(3):787–814.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Flammer C, Hong B, Minor D (2019) Corporate governance and the rise of integrating corporate social responsibility criteria in executive compensation: Effectiveness and implications for firm outcomes. Strategic Management J. 40(7):1097–1122.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Francoeur C, Labelle R, Balti S, Bouzaidi SEL (2019) To what extent do gender diverse boards enhance corporate social performance? J. Bus. Ethics 155(2):343–357.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gantchev N, Giannetti M, Li R (2022) Does money talk? Divestitures and corporate environmental and social policies. Rev. Finance 26(6):1469–1508.Crossref, Google Scholar
• García-Sánchez I-M, Suárez-Fernández O, Martínez-Ferrero J (2019) Female directors and impression management in sustainability reporting. Internat. Bus. Rev. 28(2):359–374.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Garlappi L, Giammarino R, Lazrak A (2017) Ambiguity and the corporation: Group disagreement and underinvestment. J. Financial Econom. 125(3):417–433.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gertsberg M, Mollerstrom J, Pagel M (2022) Gender quotas and support for women in board elections. Working paper, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria.Google Scholar
• Gillan SL, Koch A, Starks LT (2021) Firms and social responsibility: A review of ESG and CSR research in corporate finance. J. Corporate Finance 66:101889.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ginglinger E, Raskopf C (2023) Women directors and E&S performance: Evidence from board gender quotas. J. Corporate Finance 83:102496.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Glass C, Cook A, Ingersoll AR (2016) Do women leaders promote sustainability? Analyzing the effect of corporate governance composition on environmental performance. Bus. Strategy Environ. 25(7):495–511.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gormley TA, Gupta VK, Matsa DA, Mortal S, Yang L (2023) The big three and board gender diversity: The effectiveness of shareholder voice. J. Financial Econom. 149(2):323–348.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greene D, Intintoli VJ, Kahle KM (2020) Do board gender quotas affect firm value? Evidence from California Senate Bill No. 826. J. Corporate Finance 60:101–121.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Heath D, Ringgenberg MC, Samadi M, Werner IM (2023) Reusing natural experiments. J. Finance 78(4):2329–2364.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Herweg F, Schmidt KM (2022) How to regulate carbon emissions with climate-conscious consumers. Econom. J. 132(648):2992–3019.Google Scholar
• Hoepner AGF, Oikonomou I, Sautner Z, Starks LT, Zhou X (2024) ESG shareholder engagement and downside risk. Rev. Finance 28(2):483–510.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Houston JF, Shan H (2022) Corporate ESG profiles and banking relationships. Rev. Financial Stud. 35(7):3373–3417.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hsu P-H, Li K, Tsou C-Y (2023) The pollution premium. J. Finance 78(3):1343–1392.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Huang J, Kisgen DJ (2013) Gender and corporate finance: Are male executives overconfident relative to female executives? J. Financial Econom. 108(3):822–839.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hwang S, Shivdasani A, Simintzi E (2021) Mandating women on boards: Evidence from the United States. Working paper, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.Google Scholar
• Iliev P, Roth L (2023) Director expertise and corporate sustainability. Rev. Finance 27(6):2085–2123.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ivanov I, Kruttli MS, Watugala SW (2024) Banking on carbon: Corporate lending and cap-and-trade policy. Rev. Financial Stud. 37(5):1640–1684.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kacperczyk M, Peydro JL (2022) Carbon emissions and the bank-lending channel. Working paper, Imperial College, London.Google Scholar
• Kang JK, Kim S, Oh S (2022) Does board demographic diversity enhance cognitive diversity and monitoring? Accounting Rev. 97(6):385–415.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kim D, Starks LT (2016) Gender diversity on corporate boards: Do women contribute unique skills? Amer. Econom. Rev. Papers Proc. 106(5):267–271.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Krueger P, Sautner Z, Starks LT (2020) The importance of climate risks for institutional investors. Rev. Financial Stud. 33(3):1067–1111.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lewellen K (2022) Women in charge: Evidence from hospitals. Working paper, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH.Google Scholar
• Li X, Zhou YM (2017) Offshoring pollution while offshoring production? Strategic Management J. 38(11):2310–2329.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Li K, Liu X, Mai F, Zhang T (2021) The role of corporate culture in bad times: Evidence from the COVID-19 pandemic. J. Financial Quant. Anal. 56(7):2545–2583.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Liao L, Luo L, Tang Q (2015) Gender diversity, board independence, environmental committee and greenhouse gas disclosure. British Accounting Rev. 47(4):409–424.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Liu C (2018) Are women greener? Corporate gender diversity and environmental violations. J. Corporate Finance 52:118–142.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Malenko N (2014) Communication and decision-making in corporate boards. Rev. Financial Stud. 27(5):1486–1532.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Matsa DA, Miller AR (2013) A female style in corporate leadership? Evidence from quotas. Amer. Econom. J. Appl. Econom. 5(3):136–169.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Matos P (2020) ESG and Responsible Institutional Investing Around the World: A Critical Review (CFA Institute Research Foundation, Charlottesville, VA).Google Scholar
• Post C, Rahman N, McQuillen C (2015) From board composition to corporate environmental performance through sustainability-themed alliances. J. Bus. Ethics 130(2):423–435.Crossref, Google Scholar
• PwC (2019) PwC’s annual corporate directors’ survey. Accessed April 12, 2024, http://www.circulodedirectores.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/pwc-2019-annual-corporate-directors-survey-full-report-v2.pdf.Google Scholar
• PwC (2022) PwC’s annual corporate directors’ survey. Accessed April 12, 2024, https://pulse.icdm.com.my/article/pwcs-2022-annual-corporate-directors-survey-charting-the-course-through-a-changing-governance-landscape/.Google Scholar
• Servaes H, Tamayo A (2013) The impact of corporate social responsibility on firm value: The role of customer awareness. Management Sci. 59(5):1045–1061.Link, Google Scholar
• Schmid T, Urban D (2023) Female directors and firm value: New evidence from directors’ deaths. Management Sci. 69(4):2449–2473.Link, Google Scholar
• Starks LT, Venkat P, Zhu Q (2025) Corporate ESG profiles and investor horizons. J. Finance. Forthcoming.Google Scholar
• von Meyerinck F, Niessen-Ruenzi A, Schmid M, Solomon SD (2021) As California goes, so goes the nation? Board gender quotas and shareholders’ distaste of government interventions. Working paper, University of Zurich, Zurich.Google Scholar
• Wu X, You J, Yu X, Zhou Q(C) (2024) Leveling up your green mojo: The benefits of beneficent investment. Working Paper No. 985/2024, European Corporate Governance Institute, Brussels, Belgium.Google Scholar