1. INTRODUCTION:

Due to the Global Financial Crisis (GFC), which demonstrated the unavoidable interconnection of the global economy, the corporate sector has seen significant changes over the past several decades. As a result, businesses began to be investigated for unethical behaviour, risk management supervision, accountability, and strategic stakeholder management skills. Investors in the stock market have grown concerned about Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) issues of the corporations involved in this revolutionary development.

Given that ESG combines sustainable return and risk reduction with accountability towards the environment and society. Such ideas are becoming more common and are seen as one of the major components towards the sustainable growth of a nation¹. The fundamental principle of ESG investing states that considering ESG factors while making an investment decision can be advantageous for investors, society, and the environment. The investor of today has a wide range of alternatives to select from when making an investing decision. The researcher has long been interested in the behaviours of investors and savers. The boom, bust, depression, and recovery phases of the economy have an impact not only on the GDP level but also on family income and, in turn, on saving and investing behaviour².

Investor behaviour is presumed to be rational in traditional finance. Investors rapidly and accurately assimilate new information, but the developing discipline of behavioural finance presupposes that investors have cognitive and emotional biases that might result in irrational decision-making³. Business concerns that may have a direct or indirect impact on a company are reflected in ESG criteria. Despite not being inherent, balance sheet, income statement, risk profileand cost of capital exist. Therefore, it is crucial to understand the economic effects of ESG. The majority of prior research on this topic focused on the direct economic effects of corporate ESG performance, such as effects on financial performance or market value, but little is known about whether and how ESG performance affects investors perception before taking investment decision⁴.

The regulatory authorities have precise, mandatory standards for businesses' environmental and social responsibility (ESG) practises. Firms may perceive ESG initiatives as voluntary in this atmosphere created by the complex institutional structure. ESG elements are becoming an increasingly important factor in determining a company's performance. Therefore, businesses need to engage in ESG activities voluntarily or involuntarily and must take into account how ESG may affect investors’ investment decision in stock market⁴.As there are several investment channels with varying risk and return characteristics, investors are turning to the stock market for their investments. Depending on their needs, investors select various assets with various risk-return characteristics, and their entire portfolios reflect these choices. Investors of all genders have different perspectives on the market and its influences⁵.

1.1 Basic Idea of ESG:

An organization's management of risks and opportunities related to environmental, social, and governance criteria is explained to stakeholders using the ESG framework (sometimes called ESG factors). Environmental, Social, and Governance is referred to as ESG. ESG adopts the comprehensive viewpoint that sustainability encompasses more than just environmental concerns (corporatefinanceinstitute.com).

Environmental:

The environmental impact(s) and risk management procedures of a company are referred to as environmental factors. These include the firm's overall resilience to physical climate threats, management's stewardship of natural resources, and direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions like climate change, flooding, and fires (corporatefinanceinstitute.com). Concern about environmental awareness is widespread, especially in developing countries like India. Given their enormous potential to boost the economy, small and medium-sized businesses should pay close attention to the many practises being used in this aim⁶.

Social:

The ties a company has with its stakeholders are referred to as the social pillar. Human capital management (HCM) indicators, such as fair salaries and employee engagement, as well as an organization's influence on the communities in which it works, are examples of elements that a corporation may be judged against. The social impact expectations that have been extended to supply chain partners, particularly those in developing nations where environmental and labour regulations may be less stringent, is a distinguishing feature of ESG(corporatefinanceinstitute.com).We currently live in a world that is plagued by several social and environmental issues. A way towards resolving these issues is corporate social responsibility. In India, the idea of corporate social responsibility has been around since the 1800s, when Indian organisations started putting it into practise. As it stands, corporate social responsibility (CSR) suggests that businesses actively integrate social and environmental issues into their operations. CSR (environmental protection) is a potent weapon that not only improves the company's reputation and brand image, but also aids in staff retention and long-term sustainable growth. Contributing to CSR is currently an organization's top priority⁷.

Governance:

Corporate governance refers to a company's direction and management.To gain a better understanding of how shareholder rights are viewed and enforced, how leadership incentives are aligned with stakeholder expectationsand what kinds of internal controls are in place to encourage leadership accountability and transparency, ESG analysts will look at these and other factors (corporatefinanceinstitute.com).Engagement of institutional investors is essential and highly demanded for the corporate governance of the whole capital market⁸.

1.2 ESG Regulations in India:

MCA (Ministry of Corporates Affairs) which regulates corporations created under the Companies Act and SEBI which regulates publicly listed companies as well as asset managers those are India's main ESG regulators. SEBI’s BRR goes the furthest in promoting ESG disclosures on a mandatory basis. Separately, MCA has imposed mandatory reporting on CSR under the Companies Act. Additionally, enforcement agencies for environmental and labour regulations, such as the Central and State Pollution Control Boards and the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, contribute significantly to ESG compliance in their respective fields (https://samistilegal.in).

The Ministry of New and Renewable Energy is responsible for setting goals and benchmarks for India's renewable energy industry.In May 2021, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) established a "Sustainable Finance Group" (SFG) with the goal of coordinating with other national and international organisations on climate change-related issues, suggesting strategies, and introducing a regulatory framework, including appropriate ESG disclosures, that could be mandated for banks and other regulated entities to promote sustainable practises and mitigate climate-related risks in the Indian economy (https://samistilegal.in).

Furthermore, in 2021, the RBI noted in a paper that "green finance" is becoming a priority for public policy and that improved stakeholder coordination and information management systems could reduce the asymmetry of information regarding green projects and pave the way for sustainable economic growth. Additionally, SEBI has mandated the new BRSR format beginning in 2022–2033 (https://samistilegal.in).

2. LITERATURE REVIEW:

The literature review reveals investors perception in case of investment considering ESG factor in stock market. Many quantitative and qualitative as well as empirical and theoretical studies have explored different investment decision. This segment gives a picture of various studies led in this field in India and abroad.

Investment Decision:

Raheja and Dhiman (2017) focus on how investor personality characteristics, behavioural biases, and investing decisions relate to one another. A systematic questionnaire was used to gather the information from 500 investors in Punjab who invest via LSE Securities Ltd. According to the study, there is a statistically significant link between personality characteristics and behavioural biases and investing decisions. People chose to invest in specific investment opportunities based on their needs and with a specific goal in mind. People should make it a habit to invest at any point of their lives⁹.

Sultana etal. (2018) focused on the investment horizon is used as a moderator to examine individual stock market investors' preferences for ESG concerns and the impact that purpose of investing has on investment decision-making¹.

Hariharan and Babu (2018) the parent index and the Indian Sustainable investment indices' price behaviour are the focus of the current study. The study employed Nifty 100 as the parent index and Nifty 100 improved ESG and Nifty 100 ESG index as sustainable investing indexes. The results of descriptive statistics, the augmented Dickey-Fuller test, and the GARCH (1,1) model showed that daily prices of sustainable investment indices' returns were higher than the parent index during the study period. Daily prices of sample indices were gathered for the time period of April 2011 to March 2017. The GARCH (1, 1) model's findings demonstrated that over the research period, the volatility of Indian sustainable investment indices was lower than that of the parent indexes¹⁰.

ESG Disclosure:

Shalhoob and Hussainey (2022) emphasised to assess how environmental, social, and governance (ESG) disclosure procedures affect Saudi Arabian small and medium-sized businesses' (SMEs') performance in terms of sustainability It applies qualitative research techniques to use a sample of 30 respondents to answer the study questions in order to guide and moderate the link between the sustainability performance of SMEs and the disclosure of ESG practises. According to the findings, SMEs in Saudi Arabia are not aware of ESG practises and disclosures or the significance of these factors to sustainable performance. The outcomes of this study have numerous useful complications for many internal and external stakeholders, including managers, consultants, investors, credit agencies, lenders, policymakers, the government, and the general public in light of the possible effects of ESG disclosure policies on SMEs¹¹.

Zhang et al. (2023) investigatedthe impact on ESG disclosure of A-share listed businesses on the Shanghai Stock Exchange (SSE) and the Shenzhen Stock Exchange (SZSE) between 2014 and 2018 of the Guidelines on Building a Green Financial Systemjointly released by the People's Bank of China (PBC) and six other ministries. Analysis of the study shows that that listed enterprises in highly polluting industries, state-owned businesses, and areas with higher levels of economic growth will benefit more from the Guidance's impact on ESG disclosure quality (ESGdq)¹².

ESG and Corporate Risk:

Bairagi and Chakrabarty (2021) examined how risk perception affects the choices made by retail investors. In light of this, the study's findings indicated that individual levels of perception had a significant impact on how retail investors decide which stocks to buy. This is due to the fact that retail investors have relatively conservative financial habits, which are mirrored in their emotion, affective, and cognitive traits. To limit risk while making investing decisions, the investor should comprehend a diverse portfolio and market¹³.

Zhao et al. (2022) examines the connection between corporate risk and an organization's performance in the areas of environmental, social, and governance (ESG). The study also highlights how CEO authority modifies this connection. Better ESG performance has been found to lower firms' risk using a sample of Chinese A-share listed companies from 2011 to 2018. For the corporation with more CEO influence, the negative association between ESG performance and corporate is stronger⁴.

Financial Performance and Gender Diversity:

Ouni et al. (2020) Study to assess how gender diversity on the board of directors has affected it Regarding the financial performance and the mediating function of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) orientation in this discussion, the business development (BD) and executive committee (EC) of participating Canadian businesses relationship. 133 Canadian businesses made up the study sample, and the data, which span an 18-year period (2002–2019) with 925 observations, were collected. This study offers empirical evidence for the impact of gender diversity in turnover on a firm's financial performance and accounts for 53% of its variance. The study confirms the positive impact of gender diversity on performance and identifies the mediating mechanism through the ESG orientation of businesses, which accounts for about 4% of the overall impact of gender diversity on performance¹⁴.

Amosh and Khatib (2022) investigated the effectiveness of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors in both developing and developed nations before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study also aims to provide light on the COVID-19's effects on the effectiveness of ESG factors throughout the pandemic era. Panel regression analysis was used to evaluate the study hypotheses and attain the study goals. The study used a large worldwide panel dataset with 12,325 company-year observations spanning the years 2016–2021. The findings show that businesses have taken preparations against the COVID-19 pandemic dangers by making sure that ESG performance is adhered to in order to demonstrate their moral behaviour in a crisis¹⁵.

Taha et al. (2023) examined the moderating effects of liquidity and stock price volatility in the Jordanian industrial sector in order to determine the relationship between Corporate Sustainability Performance (CSP) and profitability. 56 Jordanian industrial companies make up the sample under investigation. In order to examine the effects of sustainability (environmental, social, and governance) on business profitability, the study created an empirical multivariate panel data model. In making judgements regarding how to improve corporate sustainability and raise the likelihood of maximising the company's profitability, investors, top management in Jordanian industrial businesses, and lawmakers in Jordan may find the data useful¹⁶.

Sustainable Development Goals:

Sadiq et al. (2022) emphasised the effect of economic growth, environmental, social, and governance (ESG), and governance (ESG) on ASEAN nations' SDG. The present study has taken secondary information from secondary sources like World Development Indicators (WDI) data from 1986 through 2020 and SDGs reports The Panel Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL) was employed in the current study to examine the relationship between the variables. The findings showed that the SDGs of the ASEAN member states were favourably correlated with the environmental score, social score, governance score, and economic growth score¹⁷.

Fei et al. (2022) investigated the board diversity (percentage of women directors, percentage of non-executive directors and board member nationality) and firm size (logarithm of total assets) on the sustainability practices (expenditures on environmental sustainability) of China's top ten registered enterprises. The researchers used a secondary source of data collection and retrieved information from the financial statements of the organizations from 2005 to 2019.Firm size (logarithmic total assets), board diversity (percentage of women directors, percentage of non-executive directors, and board member nationality), and sustainability practises (expenditures on environmental sustainability) among China's top ten registered firms all showed positive correlations. This study aids policymakers in developing strategies and laws pertaining to the implementation of sustainable practises¹⁸.

ESG Tech: Regulation and Guidance:

Natale and Cordella (2023) highlights the regulatory difficulties associated with ESG and the role that data technologies have taken in resolving these problems. Bloomberg's proprietary ES Scores system is the instance studied in this study. This study adds to the literature on e-government by highlighting how the lack of laws both accelerates and limits the application of technology and how technology both relieves regulatory worries while simultaneously acquiring governmental characteristics. This study helps to highlighting the importance of ESGTech in driving digital governance by providing insightful analyses into the complex process of producing ESG data¹⁹.

Sustainable Development and Environmental Sustainability:

Kaushiva (2016) deals with Growth strategies for sustainable development emerged when economists realised that they needed to be revised in order to meet present-day requirements without jeopardising the ability of future generations to do the same²⁰.

3. RESEARCH GAPS:

Following research gaps could be identified after reviewing of existing literatures:

· Research work on any particular district extensively is rarely found. Hence, an attempt has been made in this current study to make research based on Kolkata for evaluation of investors’ perception of their investment decision based on ESG performance of the company.

· Very few research study has been conducted by considering questionnaire survey collected from ordinary investors. This paper tries to bridge this gap.

4. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY:

The following objectives has been finalized for our study:

i) To know the basic idea of ESG (Environmental, Social and Governance) and ESG regulations in India.

ii) To review existing literature on the concept of ESG and investment decision.

iii) To identify whether there is any interdependency between genderand investors’ perception of their investment decision in Kolkata based on ESG performance of the company.

iv) To identify whether there is any interdependency between investment horizon and investors’ perception of their investment decision in Kolkata based on ESG performance of the company.

5. DATA COLLECTION AND RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:

5.1 Type of Research:

The present study is primary in nature. Also, there exists a theoretical part called secondary data by way of literature survey which is used for identification of research gaps and objectives of the study. In this study all the theoretical information is collected from various journals, reports, articles etc.

5.2 Population, Sample and Data Source:

In this study, as per objectives, our population includes all the investors investing in stock market at Kolkata district. Samples were collected through well-structured questionnaire using Google form from general investors from Kolkata by using Likert 5-point scale on the basis of convenient sampling technique. The sample size was finalized at 55 after going through the data screening process and rejecting the incomplete responses. In our study, we have ensured the representation of investors asgender wise and investment horizon wise to address the research hypothesis as per our objectives.

5.3 Research Hypothesis:

Our study includes the following hypothesis:

i) Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no interdependency between gender and investors’ perception of their investment decision based on ESG performance.

Alternative Hypothesis (H1): There is interdependency between gender and investors’ perception of their investment decision based on ESG performance.

ii) Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no interdependency between investment horizon and investors’ perception of their investment decision based on ESG performance.

Alternative Hypothesis (H1): There is interdependency between investment horizon and investors’ perception of their investment decision based on ESG performance.

5.4 Tools Used:

On the basis of our objectives, the following tools have been used for data analysis and interpret the results:

i) Different Charts and Descriptive Statistics, ii) Cronbach Alpha, iii) Shapiro-Wilk Test, iv) Mann-Whitney (U) test.

The analysis has been done by using Microsoft Excel and SPSS 16.0.

6. ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA:

6.1 Demographic Details:

6.1.1 Gender:

Figure 1 indicates the gender wise distribution of respondents in our sample. Out of 55 respondents, majority i.e.,32 (58%) are male and rest 23 (42%) are female.

Figure 1: Gender Wise Distribution of Respondents

Source: Computed from data collected through Primary Data

6.1.2 Age:

Figure 2 indicates the age wise distribution of all respondents in our sample. Out of 55 respondents, only 2 are from less than 20 age group, majority i.e., 49 (89.09%) are from 20-39 group, 4 are from 40-59 group and no respondent is above 59 age group.

Figure 2: Age Wise Distribution of Respondents

Source: Computed from data collected through Primary Data

6.1.3 Education Qualification:

Figure 3 indicates the education qualification wise distribution of all respondents in our sample. Out of 55 respondents, 3 are under-graduate, 17(30.91%) are graduate, 30(54.55%) are post graduate, 4 are professional and only 1 respondent is of other qualification.

Figure 3: Education Qualification, Wise Distribution of Respondents

Source: Computed from data collected through Primary Data

6.2 Investment Details:

6.2.1 Experience in Investment:

Figure 4 represents the experience of investment of the respondents in our sample. Out of 55 respondents, majority i.e., 40 (73%) are having less than 5 years of experience, whereas 14(25%) are having 5-10 years of experience and only 1(2%) is having more than 10 years of experience.

Figure 4: Experience of Investment of Respondents

Source: Computed from data collected through Primary Data

6.2.2 Purpose of Investment:

Figure 5 represents the purpose of investment of the respondents in our sample. Out of 55 respondents, majority i.e., 49(89%) of the respondents are investing for the savings purpose and rest 6(11%) are investing for the regular income purpose.

Figure 5: Purpose of Investment of Respondents

Source: Computed from data collected through Primary Data

6.2.3Investment Horizon:

Figure 6 represents the investment horizon of the respondents in our sample. Out of 55 respondents, majority i.e.,37 (67%) of the respondents are investing for long term purpose, whereas rest 18 (33%) are investing for short term purpose.

Figure 6: Investment Horizon of Respondents

Source: Computed from data collected through Primary Data

6.2.4 Annual Income Level:

Figure 7 represents the annual income levelof the respondents in our sample. Out of 55 respondents, majority i.e.,33 (60%) of the respondents are having income of less than Rs. 5 lacs, whereas 18 respondents are having income of Rs. 5 lacs to 10 lacs and only 4 respondents are annually earning above Rs. 10 lacs.

Figure 7: Annual Income Level of Respondents

Source: Computed from data collected through Primary Data

6.3 Awareness on ESG:

6.3.1 Investors’Idea about ESG:

Figure 8 indicates distribution of respondents as per investors’ idea about ESG. Out of 55 respondents, majority i.e., 32 (58%) of the respondents have no idea about ESG, though 23 (42%) respondents have idea about ESG.

Figure 8: Investors' Idea about ESG

Source: Computed from data collected through Primary Data

6.3.2 Investors’Consideration of ESG Factors of the Company before Investing

Figure 9 indicates distribution of respondents as per investors’ consideration of ESG factors before making any investment. Out of 55 respondents, majority i.e., 34 (62%) of the respondents do not consider factors before making any investment, though 21 (38%) respondents consider ESG factors before making any investment.

Figure 9: Consideration of ESG Factors before Investing

Source: Computed from data collected through Primary Data

6.3.3Consideration of ESG Issues by Investors before Investment Analysis:

Figure 10 indicates distribution of respondents as per investors’ consideration of ESG issues before investment analysis. Out of 55 respondents, 19 respondents consider Governance issues of a company, 2 respondents consider environmental issues, 3 respondents consider social issues, whereas majority i.e., 31 (56.36%) of the respondents do not take ESG into consideration before taking any investment analysis.

Figure 10: Investors' Consideration of ESG Issues before Investment Analysis

Source: Computed from data collected through Primary Data

6.3.4 Sources of Investors’ Information about ESG:

Figure 11 indicates distribution of respondents as per sources from where investors got to know about ESG. Out of 55 respondents, 18 (32.73%) gather information from public, 14 (25.45%) respondents collect information from report and statement of a company, 3 respondents get information through direct engagement of the company and 20 respondents are dependent on other source of information to get knowledge about ESG.

Figure 11: Sources of Information about ESG

Source: Computed from data collected through Primary Data

6.3.5 Reason Behind not Considering ESG Issues in Investment Decision:

Figure 12 indicates distribution of respondents as per reason behind not considering ESG issues in investment decision. Out of 55 respondents, majority i.e., 24 (43.64%) of the respondents have insufficient knowledge about ESG issues, 22 (40%) respondents have lack of information about ESG, 3 respondents consider these ESG issues as immaterial and 6 respondents have other reasons behind not considering ESG issues in their investment decision.

Figure 12: Reason behind not Considering ESG Issues in Investment Decision

Source: Computed from data collected through Primary Data

6.4 Analysis of the Levels of Investors’ Perceptions:

6.4.1 Descriptive Statistics:

Table 1 portrays the results of descriptive statistics. Here the maximum mean value of 2.95 is for ESG issues in investment decision and the minimum mean value of 2.38 is for ESG and corporate reputation. Highest standard deviation is 1.224 in case of ESG issues in investment decision again and the lowest standard deviation is 0.896 for ESG and financial performance. Results of skewness shows that ESG issues in investment decision, ESG and corporate reputation both are moderately skewed and rest are symmetric or fairly symmetrical in nature. Kurtosis values shows that many variables have negative values which indicates flat distribution and thin tails. So, this distribution indicates platykurtic distribution.

7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:

After analysing both the hypothesis it can concluded thatthere is no interdependency between gender and investors’ perception of their investment decision in Kolkata based on ESG performance of a company. Also, there is no interdependency between investment horizon and investors’ perception of their investment decision in Kolkata based on ESG performance of a company. It can be said that, on the basis of gender and investment horizon, investors’ decision for investment cannot be changed in Kolkata. So, it is very much clear that ESG factors have no impact on their investment decision.

It is recommended that awareness regarding ESG issues must be spread among prospective and existing investors. Lack of awareness regarding this issue leads investors to avoid these factors to make investment in security market. Government and others responsible authorities should take initiatives to promote this issue and make them aware about the positive side ESG of a company.

8. LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY:

· Our study is based on Kolkata only.

· As the responses was comparatively less, a higher sample could have given a better result in regard to find out interdependency.

· Time constraint is also a factor to collect data and to undertake this study.

9. FURTHER SCOPE OF RESEARCH:

i) ESG and investors’ perception of investment can also be measured through different other dimensions that has not been considered in our study. Hence, research work can be performed from the viewpoint of those dimensions with the help of other constructs.

ii) This study can also be performed further on other districts or at state level.

iii) Different other statistical tools and techniques can also be used to execute research in this area.

10. REFERENCES:

1. Sultana S. Zulkifli N and Zainal D. Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) and Investment Decision in Bangladesh. Sustainability.2018; 10(6): 1831.

2. DasSK.Investment Behaviour of Middle-Class Households: An Empirical Analysis. Asian Journal of Management. 2012; 3(3): 123-133.

3. Patni I and Gupta DK. Exploring the Behavioral Biases for Equity Investment: An Empirical Study on Active Investors of Jaipur City. Asian Journal of Management. 2015; 6(3): 159-162.

4. Zhao Y. Elahi E. Khalid Z. Sun Xand Sun F.Environmental, Social and Governance Performance: Analysis of CEO Power and Corporate Risk. Sustainability. 2023; 15(2): 1471.

5. Ahmed K. To Study the Impact Assessment of Demographic Variables (Gender) on Investors Decision Making in Stock Market. Emerging Issues in Finance. 2017; 14.

6. Jha A. Singh N. Chauhan SSand Mehendale S. Environmental Awareness in Small and Medium Scale Enterprises - A Methodological and Thematic Review. Asian Journal of Management. 2018; 9(1): 779-784.

7. Barik P and Pandey BB. The Key Role of Human Resource Management in Corporate Social Responsibility (Environmental Protection) in Chhattisgarh State. Asian Journal of Management. 2016; 7(3): 201-206.

8. Alam Land Masoom MR. The Role of Institutional Investors as the Next Frontier in Corporate Governance: A Case on Dhaka Stock Exchange (DSE). Asian Journal of Management. 2016; 7(4): 263-271.

9. Raheja S and Dhiman B. Influence of Personality Traits and Behavioural Biases on Investment Decision of Investors. Asian Journal of Management. 2017; 8(3): 819-826.

10. Hariharan C and Babu M. Price Behaviour of Indian Sustainable Investment - A Comparative Study. Research Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences. 2018;9(4):865-869.

11. Shalhoob H and Hussainey K. Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) Disclosure and the Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) Sustainability Performance. Sustainability. 2023; 15(1): 200.

12. Zhang C. Zhang S. Zhang Y. Yang Y and Lan K. Does Green Finance Policy Contribute to ESG Disclosure of Listed Companies? A Quasi-Natural Experiment from China. 2023; DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2270541/v1.

13. Bairagi P and Chakraborty A. Influence of Risk-Perception on Retail Investors’ Decision Making. 2021; Available at SSRN 3846839.

14. Ouni Z. Ben Mansour J and Arfaoui S. Board/Executive Gender Diversity and Firm Financial Performance in Canada: The Mediating Role of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Orientation. Sustainability. 2020; 12(20): 8386.

15. Al Amosh H and Khatib SF.ESG Performance in the Time of COVID-19 Pandemic: Cross-Country Evidence. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2023; 1-16.

16. Taha R.Al-Omush A and Al-Nimer M. Corporate Sustainability Performance and Profitability: The Moderating Role of Liquidity and Stock Price Volatility-Evidence from Jordan. Cogent Business and Management. 2023; 10(1): 2162685.

17. Sadiq M. Ngo TQ. Pantamee AA. Khudoykulov K. Thi Ngan T and Tan LP. The Role of Environmental, Social and Governance in Achieving Sustainable Development Goals: Evidence from ASEAN Countries. Economic Research - Ekonomska Istraživanja. 2023; 36(1): 170-190.

18. Fei W. Wei F. Chunxia Z and Zhen W.The Impact of Environmental, Social and Governance, Board Diversity and Firm Size on the Sustainable Development Goals of Registered Firm in China. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja. 2023; 36(1): 668-686.

19. Di Natale L and Cordella A. ESG Tech: Guiding ESG Regulation and Digital Governance.Proceedings of the 56th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. 2023.

20. Kaushiva A.Green Growth Strategy for Sustainable Development: India's Green Growth Strategy. Research Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences. 2016; 7(2): 82-88.

Received on 18.04.2023 Modified on 30.07.2023

Asian Journal of Management. 2023;14(4):273-282.

DOI: 10.52711/2321-5763.2023.00045


Investors’ Perceptions about ESG	N	Mean	Std. Deviation	Skewness		Kurtosis
Investors’ Perceptions about ESG	Statistic	Statistic	Statistic	Statistic	Std. Error	Statistic	Std. Error
Importance of ESG Factors	55	2.42	1.031	.228	.322	-.180	.634
ESG Issues in Investment Decision	55	2.95	1.224	-.081	.322	-.793	.634
ESG and Risk of Investment	55	2.69	1.016	.336	.322	-.083	.634
ESG and Return on Investment	55	2.84	1.032	.131	.322	.010	.634
ESG and Investment Opportunities	55	2.62	.952	.182	.322	-.421	.634
ESG and Financial Performance	55	2.42	.896	.335	.322	.186	.634
ESG and Corporate Reputation	55	2.38	1.080	.546	.322	.052	.634
Sufficiency of ESG Disclosure	55	2.82	.964	.251	.322	.624	.634
Mandatories of ESG Disclosure	55	2.56	1.151	.406	.322	-.408	.634
Benefits of Disclosing ESG Issues	55	2.55	1.136	.435	.322	-.280	.634
Valid N (listwise)	55

Cronbach's Alpha	N of Items
0.919	10


Investors’ Perceptions about ESG	Kolmogorov-Smirnov^a			Shapiro-Wilk
Investors’ Perceptions about ESG	Statistic	df	Sig.	Statistic	df	Sig.
Importance of ESG Factors	.241	55	.000	.867	55	.000
ESG Issues in Investment Decision	.191	55	.000	.910	55	.001
ESG and Risk of Investment	.199	55	.000	.903	55	.000
ESG and Return on Investment	.237	55	.000	.894	55	.000
ESG and Investment Opportunities	.215	55	.000	.900	55	.000
ESG and Financial Performance	.225	55	.000	.883	55	.000
ESG and Corporate Reputation	.184	55	.000	.879	55	.000
Sufficiency of ESG Disclosure	.280	55	.000	.856	55	.000
Mandatories of ESG Disclosure	.179	55	.000	.900	55	.000
Benefits of Disclosing ESG Issues	.181	55	.000	.895	55	.000

Gender (Grouping Variable)	Importance of ESG Factors	ESG Issues in Investment Decision	ESG and Risk of Investment	ESG and Return on Investment	ESG and Investment Opportunities	ESG and Financial Performance	ESG and Corporate Reputation	Sufficiency of ESG Disclosure	Mandatories of ESG Disclosure	Benefits of Disclosing ESG Issues
Mann-Whitney U	360.500	305.000	367.000	367.000	338.500	349.000	358.000	354.000	354.000	361.500
Wilcoxon W	888.500	833.000	895.000	895.000	866.500	625.000	886.000	630.000	882.000	637.500
Z	-.136	-1.110	-.018	-.018	-.529	-.345	-.178	-.263	-.248	-.115
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)	.892	.267	.986	.985	.597	.730	.859	.793	.804	.908

Investment Horizon (Grouping variable)	Importance of ESG Factors	ESG Issues in Investment Decision	ESG and Risk of Investment	ESG and Return on Investment	ESG and Investment Opportunities	ESG and Financial Performance	ESG and Corporate Reputation	Sufficiency of ESG Disclosure	Mandatories of ESG Disclosure	Benefits of Disclosing ESG Issues
Mann-Whitney U	251.500	250.000	304.500	259.000	304.500	306.500	310.000	323.500	251.000	306.500
Wilcoxon W	954.500	953.000	475.500	962.000	1.008E3	1.010E3	1.013E3	1.026E3	954.000	1.010E3
Z	-1.549	-1.537	-.537	-1.415	-.537	-.505	-.431	-.187	-1.524	-.494
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)	.121	.124	.591	.157	.591	.613	.666	.851	.127	.621

1Research Scholar, Department of Commerce, University of Calcutta, 87/1, College Street, Kolkata – 700073.

¹Research Scholar, Department of Commerce, University of Calcutta, 87/1, College Street, Kolkata – 700073.