Top Management Teams’ Environmental Attention and ESG Rating Divergence: Evidence from China

While Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) rating divergence poses a barrier to accurate sustainability measurement and sustainable investment, how internal managerial cognition addresses this external market misalignment remains underexplored. To address the research question of how executive focus shapes market consensus on corporate sustainability, this study integrates the Attention-Based View and Signaling Theory to examine the potential mitigating role of Top Management Team (TMT) environmental attention on ESG rating divergence. Utilizing high-dimensional fixed-effects regressions and textual analysis, we analyze a sample of Chinese A-share non-financial listed firms from 2015 to 2023. Empirical results indicate that a transparent and forthcoming managerial environmental focus helps reduce rating divergence, thereby partially aligning informational baselines. This cognitive alignment can act as an information calibrator, particularly when environmental issues match the firm’s core industry materiality, and this association appears more pronounced in regions with stringent environmental regulations. Robustness checks support the notion that substantive, quantitative sustainability disclosures driven by executive attention assist in alleviating informational misalignment among external rating agencies. These findings offer socio-economic and policy insights for advancing sustainable development, suggesting that regulators could consider encouraging structured sustainability reporting to support the role of executive cognition in standardizing ESG measurements.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Sustainability
Published
2026-04-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/su18084131
Primary Topic
Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Top Management Teams’ Environmental Attention and ESG Rating Divergence: Evidence from China

Yishi Qiu, Susheng Wang
Sustainability
Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting
article

Top Management Teams’ Environmental Attention and ESG Rating Divergence: Evidence from China

Yishi Qiu, Susheng Wang
article en

Abstract

While Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) rating divergence poses a barrier to accurate sustainability measurement and sustainable investment, how internal managerial cognition addresses this external market misalignment remains underexplored. To address the research question of how executive focus shapes market consensus on corporate sustainability, this study integrates the Attention-Based View and Signaling Theory to examine the potential mitigating role of Top Management Team (TMT) environmental attention on ESG rating divergence. Utilizing high-dimensional fixed-effects regressions and textual analysis, we analyze a sample of Chinese A-share non-financial listed firms from 2015 to 2023. Empirical results indicate that a transparent and forthcoming managerial environmental focus helps reduce rating divergence, thereby partially aligning informational baselines. This cognitive alignment can act as an information calibrator, particularly when environmental issues match the firm’s core industry materiality, and this association appears more pronounced in regions with stringent environmental regulations. Robustness checks support the notion that substantive, quantitative sustainability disclosures driven by executive attention assist in alleviating informational misalignment among external rating agencies. These findings offer socio-economic and policy insights for advancing sustainable development, suggesting that regulators could consider encouraging structured sustainability reporting to support the role of executive cognition in standardizing ESG measurements.

SustainabilityVol. 18(8)
Southern University of Science and Technology (CN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.