Mediating Role of Board Gender Diversity between ESGDAnd Firm Performance: ‎Developing A ConceptualA Framework for Malaysia

  • Authors

    • Nuha Hamed Alofi Assistant Professor, Applied College, Taibah University, Madinah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
    https://doi.org/10.14419/q3x12y43

    Received date: December 14, 2025

    Accepted date: February 1, 2026

    Published date: February 7, 2026

  • Environmental Disclosure; Governance Disclosure; Social Disclosure; Board Gender Diversity; ‎Firm Performance; Malaysia

  • Abstract

    Purpose – The purpose of this study is to present a conceptual framework for merging ‎environmental, social, and governance disclosure (ESGD), company performance, and board ‎gender diversity (BGD) practices within the Malaysian corporate context.‎

    Design/methodology/approach – This method involves conducting a literature review and developing a framework to investigate the relationship between ESGD and firm performance among Malaysian firms. Furthermore, BGD may have a role in mediating this link.‎

    Findings: The framework integrates environmental, social, and governance disclosures with ‎firm performance, highlighting the mediating function of board gender diversity and being ‎hypothesis-driven. ‎

    Research limitations/implications: This conceptual framework provides a foundation for ‎future empirical research and provides insights to Malaysian regulators, board members, ‎academics, and investors aiming to reconcile sustainable practices with financial success. They ‎underscore the significance of board efficacy and gender diversity in executing sustainable ‎policies. ‎

    Originality/value: The literature has seen a paradigm shift highlighting the significance of ‎ESGD and BGD in evaluating firm performance. This paper provides a framework for ESGD ‎via a review of the available literature and highlights the importance of BGD‎.

  • References

    1. Abdelkader, M. G., Gao, Y., & Elamer, A. A. (2024). Board gender diversity and ESGD performance: The mediating role of temporal orientation in the South Africa context. Journal of Cleaner Production, 440, 140728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.140728.
    2. Aboud, A. and Diab, A. (2018), "The impact of social, environmental and corporate governance disclosures on firm value", Journal of Accounting in Emerging Economies, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 442-458. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAEE-08-2017-0079.
    3. Agliardi, E., Alexopoulos, T., & Karvelas, K. (2023). The environmental pillar of ESGD and financial performance: A portfolio analysis. Energy Eco-nomics, 120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2023.106598.
    4. Agyemang-Mintah, P., & Schadewitz, H. (2017). Gender diversity and firm value: Evidence from UK financial institutions. International Journal of Accounting & Information Management, 27(1), 38. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJAIM-06-2017-0073.
    5. Aldulaimi, S., Soni, S., Kampoowale, I., Krishnan, G., Ab Yajid, M. S., Khatibi, A., ... & Khurana, M. (2025). Customer perceived ethicality and elec-tronic word of mouth approach to customer loyalty: the mediating role of customer trust. International Journal of Ethics and Systems, 41(1), 258-278. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOES-03-2024-0088.
    6. Arayssi, M., Jizi, M., & Tabaja, H. H. (2020). The impact of board composition on the level of ESGD disclosures in GCC countries. Sustainability Ac-counting, Management and Policy Journal, 11(1), 137–161. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-05-2018-0136.
    7. Bernardi, C. and Stark, A. (2018), “Environmental, social and governance disclosure, integrated reporting, and the accuracy of analyst forecasts”, Brit-ish Accounting Review,Vol.50, No.1, pp. 16–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2016.10.001.
    8. Branco, M.C. and Rodrigues, L.L. (2006), “Corporate social responsibility and resource-based perspectives”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 69 No. 2, 111–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2016.10.001.
    9. Brooks, C. and Oikonomou, I. (2017), “The effects of environmental, social and governance disclosures and performance on firm value: A review of the literature in accounting and finance”, The British Accounting Review, Vol. 50, No. 1, pp. 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2017.11.005.
    10. Byron, K. and Post, C. (2016), “Women on boards of directors and corporate social performance: a Meta- analysis”, Corporate Governance: An Inter-national Review, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 428-442. https://doi.org/10.1111/corg.12165.
    11. Calabrese, G. G., & Manello, A. (2021). Board diversity and performance in a masculine, aged and glocal supply chain: New empirical evidence. Cor-porate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 21(7), 1440–1459. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-09-2020-0417.
    12. Carnini Pulino, S., Ciaburri, M., Magnanelli, B. S., & Nasta, L. (2022). Does ESGD influence firm performance? Sustainability, 14(13), 7595. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14137595.
    13. Chijoke‐Mgbame, A. M., Boateng, A., & Mgbame, C. O. (2020). Board gender diversity, audit committee and financial performance: evidence from Nigeria. Accounting Forum, 44(3), 262–286. https://doi.org/10.1080/01559982.2020.1766280.
    14. Cho, S. J., Chung, C. Y., & Young, J. (2019). Study on the relationship between CSR and financial performance. Sustainability (Switzerland), 11(2). https://doi.org/10.3390/su11020343.
    15. Cho, Y., Kim, S., You, J., Moon, H., & Sung, H. (2021). Application of ESGD measures for gender diversity and equality at the organizational level in a Korean context. European Journal of Training and Development, 45(4/5), 346-365. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJTD-05-2020-0090.
    16. Cumba, L.T., Huang, X., Zhang, Z. and Muhammad, S. (2024). The mediating effect of entrepreneurship on financial support and economic growth in African emerging economies, International Journal of Emerging Markets, Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOEM-03-2022-0453.
    17. Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of management Re-view, 20(1), 65-91. https://doi.org/10.2307/258887.
    18. Dong, Y., Liang, C., & Wanyin, Z. (2023). Board diversity and firm performance: Impact of ESGD activities in China. Economic research-Ekonomska istraˇ zivanja, 36(1),1592–1609. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2022.2090406.
    19. Duppati, G., Rao, N. V., Matlani, N., Scrimgeour, F., & Patnaik, D. (2020). Gender diversity and firm performance: Evidence from India and Singa-pore. Applied Economics, 52(1466– 4283), 14. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2019.1676872.
    20. Essers, C., & Benschop, Y. (2009). Muslim businesswomen doing boundary work: The negotiation of Islam, gender and ethnicity within entrepreneuri-al contexts. Human Relations, 62(3), 403– 423. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726708101042.
    21. Eversheds Report. (2013). The Eversheds Board Report: The effective board. Eversheds LLP, Office: One Wood Street, London EC2V 7WS.
    22. Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1983). Separation of ownership and control. The journal of law and Economics, 26(2), 301-325. https://doi.org/10.1086/467037.
    23. Freeman, B. G., Lee‐Yaw, J. A., Sunday, J. M., & Hargreaves, A. L. (2018). Expanding, shifting and shrinking: The impact of global warming on spe-cies’ elevational distributions. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 27(11), 1268-1276. https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.12774.
    24. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman Press.
    25. Freeman, R. E., Harrison, J. S., & Zyglidopoulos, S. (2018). Stakeholder theory: Concepts and strategies. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108539500.
    26. Freudenreich, B., Lüdeke-Freund, F., & Schaltegger, S. (2020). A stakeholder theory perspective on business models: Value creation for sustainabil-ity. Journal of Business Ethics, 166, 3-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04112-z.
    27. Fuadah, L. L., Mukhtaruddin, M., Andriana, I., & Arisman, A. (2022). The ownership structure, and the environmental, social, and governance (ESGD) disclosure, firm value and firm performance: The audit committee as moderating variable. Economies, 10(12), 314. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies10120314.
    28. Garavan, T.N. and McGuire, D. (2010), “Human resource development and society: human resource development’s role in embedding corporate social responsibility, sustainability, and ethics in organizations”, Advances in Developing Human Resources, Vol. 12 No. 5, pp. 487-507. https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422310394757.
    29. Glass, C. and Cook, A. (2018), “Do women leaders promote positive change? Analyzing the effect of gender on business practices and diversity initia-tives”, Human Resource Management, Vol. 57 No. 4, pp. 823-837. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21838.
    30. Gonçalves, T. C., Barros, V., & Avelar, J. V. (2023). Environmental, social and governance scores in Europe: What drives financial performance for larger firms? Economics and Business Letters, 12(2), 121–131. https://doi.org/10.17811/ebl.12.2.2023.121-131.
    31. Green, CP., & Homroy, S. (2018). Female directors, board committees and firm performance. European Economic Review, 102(2018), 19–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2017.12.003.
    32. Hall, D. L., & Ames, R. T. (2000). Sexism, with Chinese characteristics. The sage and the second sex: Confucianism, ethics, and gender. Open Court
    33. Hill, C. W., & Jones, T. M. (1992). Stakeholder-agency theory. Journal of Management Studies, 29(2), 131–154. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.1992.tb00657.x.
    34. Hussain, S. A. D. I. A., Kampoowale, I. S. H. A., Sadia, H. U. M. A., & Hall, S. M. (2022). Linking organizational climate with Psychological capital: Organizational Innovative culture as moderator. J. Hum. Univ. Nat. Sci, 4, 18-30.
    35. Islam, R., French, E., & Ali, M. (2022). Evaluating board diversity and its importance in the environmental and social performance of organizations. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 29(5), 1134–1145. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2259.
    36. Joshi, M., Azam, S. F., Kampoowale, I., Nivarthi, S., Shukla, R. P., Priye, A., & Singh, M. (2025). Predicting ethical banking behavior among millenni-als and Gen-Z using theory of planned behaviors. International Journal of Ethics and Systems. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2259.
    37. Kampoowale, I. (2025). Linking big data analytics capabilities to organizational learning through knowledge management and data-driven decision-making. The TQM Journal. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-08-2024-0282.
    38. Kampoowale, I., & Khalid, J. (2025). COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW OF EMPLOYMENT EQUALITY AND WOMEN'S EMPOWERMENT IN SOUTH ASIAN FEMALE ENTREPRENEURSHIP.
    39. Kampoowale, I., Singh, A. P. D. H., Sakka, A. A. B., Iwuchukwu, E., & Al-Shaikhli, E. A. A. (2023). The impact of manufacturing capability, net-working capability and digital capability on Smes firm performance in India. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sci-ences, 13(9), 775-793. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v13-i9/17827.
    40. Kampoowale, I., Singh, H., & Kumar, S. (2025). Factors influencing the successful digital transformation of human resource management in the organ-ization. In Insights Into Digital Business, Human Resource Management, and Competitiveness (pp. 127-148). IGI Global Scientific Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-9440-3.ch005.
    41. Kampoowale, I., Singh, H., & Kumar, S. (2025). Factors influencing the successful digital transformation of human resource management in the organ-ization. In Insights Into Digital Business, Human Resource Management, and Competitiveness (pp. 127-148). IGI Global Scientific Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-9440-3.ch005.
    42. Katmon, N., Mohamad, Z. Z., Norwani, N. M., & Farooque, O. A. (2019). Comprehensive board diversity and quality of corporate social responsibility disclosure: Evidence from an emerging market. Journal of Business Ethics, 157, 447–481. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3672-6.
    43. Kotsantonis, S., Pinney, C. and Serafeim, G. (2016), “ESGD integration in investment management: Myths and realities”, Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 10-16. https://doi.org/10.1111/jacf.12169.
    44. Lagarde, C. (2010). What if it had been Lehman Sisters? The International Herald Tribune. May 11. http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2010/05/11/lagarde-wh.
    45. Lee, S. P., & Isa, M. (2023). Environmental, social and governance (ESGD) practices and financial performance of Shariah-compliant companies in Malaysia. Journal of Islamic Accounting and Business Research, 14(2), 295–314. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIABR-06-2020-0183.
    46. Li, Y., Gong, M., Zhang, X.-Y., & Koh, L. (2018). The impact of environmental, social, and governance disclosure on firm value: The role of CEO power. The British Accounting Review, 50(1), 60–75. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIABR-06-2020-0183.
    47. Manita, R., Bruna, M. G., Dang, R., & Houanti, L. H. (2018). Board gender diversity and ESGD disclosure: Evidence from the USA. Journal of Ap-plied Accounting Research, 19(2), 206–224. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAAR-01-2017-0024.
    48. Mensi-Klarbach, H., Leixnering, S., & Schiffinger, M. (2021). The carrot or the stick: Self-regulation for gender-diverse boards via codes of good gov-ernance. Journal of Business Ethics, 170(3), 577–593. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04336-z.
    49. Miles, K. (2011), “Embedding gender in sustainability reports”, Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 139-146. https://doi.org/10.1108/20408021111162164.
    50. MSCI (2018), “MSCI Japan empowering women index (WIN) factsheet”, available at: www.msci.com/ documents/10199/1aaa3df9-32c8-4554-8e3b-f9b41c4d0a70 (accessed 2 September, 2019).
    51. Mun, E. and Jung, J. (2018), “Change above the glass ceiling: corporate social responsibility and gender diversity in Japanese firms”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 63 No. 2, pp. 409-440. https://doi.org/10.1108/20408021111162164.
    52. Ouni, Z., Mansour, J. Ben, & Arfaoui, S. (2020). Board/executive gender diversity and firm financial performance in Canada: The mediating role of environmental, social, and governance (ESGD) orientation. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(20), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12208386.
    53. Qiu, Y., Shaukat, A. and Tharyan, R. (2016), “Environmental and social disclosures: Link with the corporate financial performance”, British Account-ing Review, Vol. 48, pp. 102–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2014.10.007.
    54. Rahman, H. U., Zahid, M., & Al-Faryan, M. A. S. (2023). Boardroom gender diversity and firm performance: from the lens of voluntary regula-tions,“tokenism” and “critical mass”. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 34(3-4), 345-363. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2022.2056439.
    55. Rahman, H. U., Zahid, M., & Al-Faryan, M. A. S. (2023b). ESGD and firm performance: The rarely explored moderation of sustainability strategy and top management commitment. Journal of Cleaner Production, 404, Article 136859. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.136859.
    56. Rahman, H.U., Zahid, M., & Khan, M. (2021). Corporate sustainability practices: A new perspec- tive of linking board with firm performance. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2021.1908826.
    57. Sakka, A. A., Singh, H., Iwuchukwu, E., Kampoowale, I., & Albalushi, H. A. A. The Impact of Psychological Capital and Mediation Role of Extrinsic Motivation on Employee Productivity on Manufacturing SMES in Malaysia.
    58. Sghaier, A., & Hamza, T. (2018). Does boardroom gender diversity affect the risk profile of acquiring banks? Managerial Finance, 44(10), 1174–1199. https://doi.org/10.1108/MF-09-2017-0373.
    59. Shakil, M. H., Tasnia, M., & Mostafiz, M. I. (2020). Board gender diversity and environmental, social and governance performance of US banks: mod-erating role of environmental, social and corporate governance controversies. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 39(4), 661–677. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJBM-04-2020-0210.
    60. Strydom, M., Yong, H.H.A. and Rankin, M. (2017), “A few good (wo)men? Gender diversity on Australian boards”, Australian Journal of Manage-ment, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 404-427. https://doi.org/10.1177/0312896216657579.
    61. Tantalo, C. and Priem, R. L. (2016), “Value creation through stakeholder synergy”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 314-329. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2337.
    62. Thanh Nguyen, D., Gia Hoan, T., & Gia Tran, H. (2022). Help or Hurt? The Impact of ESGD on Firm Performance in S&P 500 Non-Financial Firms. https://doi.org/10.14453/aabfj.v16i2.7.
    63. Tleubayev, A., Bobojonov, I., Gagalyuk, T., & Glauben, T. (2019). Board gender diversity and firm performance: Evidence from the Russian agri-food industry. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, 23(1), 35–53. https://doi.org/10.22434/IFAMR2019.0011.
    64. Ullah, I., Fang, H., & Jebran, K. (2019). Do gender diversity and ceo gender enhance firm’ s value ? Evidence from an emerging economy. 20(1), 44–66. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-03-2019-0085.
    65. Wasiuzzaman, S., & Wan Mohammad, W. M. (2020). Board gender diversity and transparency of environmental, social and governance disclosure: Evidence from Malaysia. Managerial and Decision Economics, 41(1), 145–156. https://doi.org/10.1002/mde.3099.
    66. Yoon, B., Lee, J.H. and Byun, R. (2018), “Does ESGD Performance Enhance Firm Value? Evidence from Korea”, Sustainability, Vol. 10, No.10, PP 3635. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103635.
    67. Yousaf, U.B., Jebran, K. and Wang, M. (2021), “Can board diversity predict the risk of financial distress?”, Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 663-684. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-06-2020-0252.
    68. Zulfiqar, U., Singh, H., & Kampoowale, I. (2022). Factors Influencing Pakistan International Tourist Arrival: A Study from 2014-2019. Sciences, 12(5), 1690-1703.

  • Downloads

  • How to Cite

    Hamed Alofi, N. . (2026). Mediating Role of Board Gender Diversity between ESGDAnd Firm Performance: ‎Developing A ConceptualA Framework for Malaysia. International Journal of Accounting and Economics Studies, 13(1), 706-711. https://doi.org/10.14419/q3x12y43