Dimensi Environmental, Social, dan Governance (ESG) Sebagai Praktik Keberlanjutan: Hubungannya dengan Profitabilitas dan Peran Corporate Life Cycle Pada Perusahaan Sektor Energi dalam ISSI

Ferdy Tanzil; Teguh Setiawan; Zuwina Miraza

doi:10.58230/g84f0f22

Authors

Ferdy Tanzil Jurusan Manajemen, Fakultas Ekonomi Bisnis, Universitas Harapan Medan, Indonesia
Teguh Setiawan Jurusan Manajemen, Fakultas Ekonomi Bisnis, Universitas Harapan Medan, Indonesia
Zuwina Miraza Jurusan Manajemen, Fakultas Ekonomi Bisnis, Universitas Harapan Medan, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.58230/g84f0f22

Keywords:

Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG), profitabilitas, Corporate Life Cycle, Moderated Regression Analysis (MRA), Indeks Saham Syariah Indonesia (ISSI)

Abstract

This study aims to examine the relationships between Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) dimensions and profitability and to investigate whether the Corporate Life Cycle moderates these relationships among energy-sector companies listed in the Indonesia Sharia Stock Index (ISSI) during 2021–2024. From a social inquiry perspective, ESG is viewed as a corporate practice reflecting environmental responsibility, social responsibility toward employees and communities, and governance accountability.

This study employed a quantitative approach using secondary data obtained from annual reports, sustainability reports, and financial statements. From an initial population of 89 companies, 26 companies were selected through purposive sampling, generating 104 firm-year observations. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, multiple linear regression, and Moderated Regression Analysis (MRA) with IBM SPSS Statistics.

The main regression results indicate that the Environmental dimension was not significantly associated with profitability (B = −0.023; p = 0.539), whereas the Social (B = 0.122; p = 0.047) and Governance (B = 0.589; p < 0.001) dimensions showed positive and significant relationships with profitability. The simultaneous test was also statistically significant. The available interaction coefficients between ESG dimensions and the Corporate Life Cycle were not statistically significant. However, conclusions regarding the moderating role of the Corporate Life Cycle should be interpreted cautiously pending verification of the complete MRA model and consistency of its operational measurement.

The findings provide contextual evidence that ESG dimensions are differently associated with the profitability of energy companies listed in the ISSI. Social and governance dimensions appear more closely associated with profitability than the environmental dimension. These findings highlight the importance of evaluating ESG dimensions separately and avoiding the assumption that profitability represents overall sustainability performance. Further verification of ESG measurement and the Corporate Life Cycle moderation model is required before definitive conclusions regarding the moderating effect can be established.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.

https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108

Busch, T., & Friede, G. (2018). The robustness of the corporate social and financial performance relation: A second-order meta-analysis. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 25(4), 583–608.

https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1480

Dickinson, V. (2011). Cash flow patterns as a proxy for firm life cycle. The Accounting Review, 86(6), 1969–1994.

https://doi.org/10.2308/accr-10130

Fatemi, A., Glaum, M., & Kaiser, S. (2018). ESG performance and firm value: The moderating role of disclosure. Global Finance Journal, 38, 45–64.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfj.2017.03.001

Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman.

Friede, G., Busch, T., & Bassen, A. (2015). ESG and financial performance: Aggregated evidence from more than 2,000 empirical studies. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 5(4), 210–233.

https://doi.org/10.1080/20430795.2015.1118917

Ghozali, I. (2018). Aplikasi analisis multivariate dengan program IBM SPSS 25 (Edisi ke-9). Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.

Handoyo, S., & Anas, S. (2024). The effect of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) on firm performance: The moderating role of country regulatory quality and government effectiveness in ASEAN. Cogent Business & Management, 11(1), Article 2371071.

https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2371071

Hirsch, S., Petersen, T., Koppenberg, M., & Hartmann, M. (2023). CSR and firm profitability: Evidence from a meta-regression analysis. Journal of Economic Surveys, 37(3), 993–1032.

https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12523

Horváthová, E. (2010). Does environmental performance affect financial performance? A meta-analysis. Ecological Economics, 70(1), 52–59.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.04.004

Ida, I., Tjandrasa, B. B., & Setyawan, S. (2025). ESG and profitability: The moderating of leverage in the Indonesian energy sector. Jurnal Muara Ilmu Ekonomi dan Bisnis, 9(2).

https://doi.org/10.24912/jmieb.v9i2.35444

Kasmir. (2020). Analisis laporan keuangan. Rajawali Pers.

Qu, W., & Zhang, J. (2023). Environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG), life cycle, and firm performance: Evidence from China. Sustainability, 15(18), Article 14011.

https://doi.org/10.3390/su151814011

Sugiyono. (2018). Metode penelitian kuantitatif, kualitatif, dan R&D. Alfabeta.