This study investigates how environmental, social, and governance (ESG) performance, as well as disagreement in ESG ratings, influences the maturity mismatch between corporate investment and financing (MMIF). Our findings show that firms with higher ESG scores exhibit a lower degree of MMIF, suggesting that better ESG practices help alleviate maturity mismatches. However, inconsistencies in ESG evaluations across rating agencies reduce this beneficial effect. Further analysis indicates that disa…
Read moreThis study investigates how environmental, social, and governance (ESG) performance, as well as disagreement in ESG ratings, influences the maturity mismatch between corporate investment and financing (MMIF). Our findings show that firms with higher ESG scores exhibit a lower degree of MMIF, suggesting that better ESG practices help alleviate maturity mismatches. However, inconsistencies in ESG evaluations across rating agencies reduce this beneficial effect. Further analysis indicates that disagreement among ESG ratings diminishes the ability of high ESG scores to relax financing constraints, which is identified as a critical mechanism for ESG's impact on MMIF. The moderating impact of ESG disagreement is especially significant for firms in regions with less banking competition, those with greater information asymmetry, and non-state-owned enterprises. In addition, our results indicate that environmental and governance components are the main driving factors. These findings highlight the necessity of considering both ESG performance and disagreements in ESG assessments when evaluating firms' investment and financing activities.
