Comparative Analysis of ESG Performance among ASEAN Firms: Evidence from Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, and Indonesia

This study examines the comparative Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) performance of firms in four ASEAN economies; Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, and Indonesia from 2019 to 2023. Using secondary data obtained from Refinitiv Eikon Datastream, the analysis covers a final sample of 758 listed firms, representing 3,790 firm-year observations. The study employs a descriptive analytical approach to explore cross-country, temporal, and sectoral variations in ESG performance. The general findings show that ESG performance in ASEAN has improved steadily over the five-year period, though the rate and consistency differ among nations. Thailand continues to lead in both average ESG scores and reporting uniformity, reflecting strong regulatory frameworks and institutional support. Indonesia demonstrates sustained progress, possibly driven by sustainability regulations and the growing influence of the Otoritas Jasa Keuangan (OJK). Singapore maintains a stable yet moderate performance, consistent with its adherence to global standards such as the GRI and TCFD frameworks. Malaysia, however, exhibits a gradual decline in ESG scores and higher variability, suggesting uneven ESG adoption and differences in disclosure quality across sectors. Sectoral analysis indicates that Energy, Financials, and Industrials outperform Consumer and Technology industries, underscoring the role of regulatory enforcement and environmental exposure. Overall, the study concludes that ASEAN’s ESG landscape is evolving positively but remains fragmented, highlighting the need for stronger regional harmonisation to enhance comparability, transparency, and sustainable growth.

ASEAN, ESG performance, stakeholder theory

1. Abu Afifa, M., Nguyen, N. M., & Bui, D. V. (2025). Environmental, social and governance (ESG) disclosure quality in developing countries: Evidence from the ASEAN region. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-03-2024-0110 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Alakent, E., & Goktan, M. S. (2025). Do variations in institutional characteristics across countries affect ESG reporting ratings? Journal of Accounting, Ethics & Public Policy (JAEPP), 26(1), 57–77. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Alhazemi, A. (2025). Integrating ESG framework with social sustainability metrics: A dual SEM–PLS formative–reflective model perspective. Sustainability, 17(6), 2566. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17062566 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Amiraslani, H., Lins, K. V., Servaes, H., & Tamayo, A. (2023). Trust, social capital, and the bond market benefits of ESG performance. Review of Accounting Studies, 28(2), 421–462. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Andréason, L., & Miskolczi, V. (2024). Navigating ESG: Examining the relationship between ESG and bankruptcy risk for European manufacturers. European Journal of Sustainable Finance and Investment, 14(2), 118–134. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Antoni, A. (2024). Analysis of the impact of ESG (environmental, social, governance) on company financial performance in Indonesia post–Green Taxonomy implementation. Amkop Management Accounting Review (AMAR), 4(2), 75–86. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Awa, H. O., Etim, W., & Ogbonda, E. (2024). Stakeholders, stakeholder theory and corporate social responsibility (CSR). International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, 9(1), 11-25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40991-024-00091-4 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Bagratuni, K., Kashina, E., Kletskova, E., Kapustina, D., Ivashkin, M., Sinyukov, V., Karshalova, A., Hajiyev, H., & Hajiyev, E. (2023). Impact of socially responsible business behavior on implementing the principles of sustainable development (Experience of large business). International Journal of Sustainable Development & Planning, 18(8), 2481–2488. https://doi.org/10.18280/ijsdp.180819 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Becchetti, L., Bobbio, E., Prizia, F., & Semplici, L. (2022). Going deeper into the “S” of ESG: A relational approach to the definition of social responsibility. Sustainability, 14(15), 9668. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159668 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Caputo, F., Pizzi, S., Ligorio, L., & Leopizzi, R. (2021). Enhancing environmental information transparency through corporate social responsibility reporting regulation. Business Strategy and the Environment, 30(8), 3470–3484. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Cerqueti, R., Ciciretti, R., Dalò, A., & Nicolosi, M. (2021). ESG investing: A chance to reduce systemic risk. Journal of Financial Stability, 54, 100887. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Chokchaisiri, P. (2023). ESG performance and dividend payout in ASEAN: The moderation by cash holdings (Doctoral dissertation, Thammasat University). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Chou, C., Clark, R., & Kimbrough, S. O. (2023). What do firms say in reporting on impacts of climate change? An approach to monitoring ESG actions and environmental policy. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 30(5), 2664–2678. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Chua, W. F., James, R., King, A., Lee, E., & Soderstrom, N. (2022). Task Force on Climate‐related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) implementation: An overview and insights from the Australian Accounting Standards Board Dialogue Series. Australian Accounting Review, 32(3), 396–405. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Dao, T. T. B., & Phan, M. C. (2023). Stakeholder theory, risk-taking and firm performance. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 23(7), 1623–1647. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Dmytriyev, S. D., Freeman, R. E., & Hörisch, J. (2021). The relationship between stakeholder theory and corporate social responsibility: Differences, similarities, and implications for social issues in management. Journal of Management Studies, 58(6), 1441–1470. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston, MA: Pitman. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Friede, G., Busch, T., & Bassen, A. (2015). ESG and financial performance: Aggregated evidence from more than 2000 empirical studies. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 5(4), 210–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/20430795.2015.1118917 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Fu, T., & Li, J. (2023). An empirical analysis of the impact of ESG on financial performance: The moderating role of digital transformation. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 11, 1256052. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Funken, S. (2023). Theory and empirical evidence on the accuracy of ESG metrics: An empirical investigation of Refinitiv ESG performance scores (Doctoral dissertation, Bergische Universität Wuppertal). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Gawęda, A. (2024). Does the sustainability of the country differentiate the ESG of companies and how it affects the relationship between ESG and firm value? Evidence from the European Union. Annales Universitatis Mariae Curie-Skłodowska, Sectio H Oeconomia, 58(4), 7–23. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Ghannadighomi, N., Johansson, E., & Saliba, B. (2023). An empirical study about the relationship between ESG and firm performance in Nordic countries with the moderating effect of environmental innovation. Scandinavian Journal of Business Research, 15(2), 88–105. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Gladilina, I., Hajiyev, H., Vaslavskaya, I., Kirillova, E., Dymchenko, O., Hajiyev, E., Averina, O., & Shechitah, R. (2024). Adapting ESG principles to contracting practices: Towards sustainable business agreements. International Journal of Sustainable Development & Planning, 19(7), 2627–2634. https://doi.org/10.18280/ijsdp.190719 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. 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), 2371071. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Hara, M. (2025). Sustainable business and global supply chains in ASEAN: Escaping the middle-income trap. American Journal of Business Science Philosophy (AJBSP), 181–199. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Ibrahim, M., Auwal, B. M., Balarabe, A. S., & Isa, I. A. (2024). Sustainability reporting frameworks: A comparative analysis of reporting standards and their implications for accounting and reporting. International Journal of Accounting, Finance and Administrative Research, 1(2), 32–47. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Ionașcu, A. E., Hordofa, D. F., Dănilă, A., Spătariu, E. C., Burcă, A. L., & Horga, M. G. (2025). ESG performance in the EU and ASEAN: The roles of institutional governance, economic structure, and global integration. Sustainability, 17(17), 7997. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Irianto, E. D. O., Kesuma, M. R., Aini, R. N., Henrika, M., & Ariswati, L. D. (2025). Role of sustainable finance in driving environmental, social and governance (ESG)-based investments. JEMBA: Jurnal Ekonomi Pembangunan, Manajemen & Bisnis, Akuntansi, 5(1), 36–46. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Kartikasary, M., Adi, M. P. H., Sitinjak, M. M., Hardiyansyah, H., & Sari, D. Y. (2023). Environmental, social and governance (ESG) report quality and firm value in Southeast Asia. In E3S Web of Conferences (Vol. 426, p. 02087). EDP Sciences. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Katisart, N., Strache, S., & Saenchaiyathon, K. (2023). ESG disclosure in Thailand: An analysis of hard and soft disclosures. Journal of Accounting Profession, 19(63), 106–133. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Koseoglu, M. A., Arici, H. E., Saydam, M. B., & Olorunsola, V. O. (2024). Environmental, social and governance assets and diversity scores: Exploring their relationship to carbon emissions in global companies. Management Decision, 62(10), 3181–3207. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Liu, P., Zhu, B., Yang, M., & Chu, X. (2022). ESG and financial performance: A qualitative comparative analysis in China’s new energy companies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 379, 134721. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Lopes, F. R. R., De Araujo, F. O., Do Nascimento, F. R., & Dos Santos Ramos, W. (2025). ES(?)G—The social dimension as a necessary counterpoint to the market’s desires. In Critical Factors Associated with Environmental, Social and Governance Management in Organizations (pp. 129–146). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Marsico, M. (2022). The impact of ESG ratings on default probability: An empirical analysis on European firms. European Journal of Finance and Risk Analysis, 12(3), 77–98. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Midtkandal, E., & Kyte, L. F. (2023). ESG: The nexus of sustainability and cost of capital? An empirical study of the relationship between ESG scores and WACC for European firms (Master’s thesis, BI Norwegian Business School). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Misman, S. N., & Adnan, I. H. (2023). A study on the Malaysian sustainability reporting guidelines for Islamic financial institutions. International Journal of Islamic Economics and Finance Research, 1(1), 103–115. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Mohamad, N. E. A., & Saad, N. M. (2021). Comparative analysis of environmental, social and governance (ESG) implementations across Asia. Global Business and Management Research, 13(4s), 554–563. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Mu, H. L., Xu, J., & Chen, S. (2024). The impact of corporate social responsibility types on happiness management: A stakeholder theory perspective. Management Decision, 62(2), 591–613. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Müller, R., Caron, M. A., Drouin, N., Lereim, J., Alonderienė, R., Chmieliauskas, A., ... & Šuminskienė, R. (2025). Governance of ESG implementations: Governance dimensions and their structural implementation. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 18(1), 118–138. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Mulyana, D., Widyaningsih, A., & Yuniarti Rozali, R. D. (2024). Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) performance and corporate value: Unpacking the moderating effect of company size. Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis Airlangga, 35(1), 147-165. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Oana-Marina, R. A. D. U., Dragomir, V. D., & Ionescu-Feleagă, L. (2023). The conceptual link between country competitiveness and corporate ESG performance. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence (Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 763–775). Sciendo. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Prabawati, P. I., & Rahmawati, I. P. (2022). The effects of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) scores on firm values in ASEAN member countries. Jurnal Akuntansi dan Auditing Indonesia, 26(2), 119–129. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. Quintiliani, A. (2022). ESG and firm value. Accounting and Finance Research, 11(4), 37–49. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. Skvarciany, V., & Jurevičienė, D. (2024). Harmonising ESG practices for lasting sustainability. In Exploring ESG challenges and opportunities: Navigating towards a better future (pp. 221–242). Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-80455-991-620241012 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. Soon, S. W. (2021). Corporate governance disclosure practices and firm performance: The case of ASEAN. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

46. Tahmid, T., Hoque, M. N., Said, J., Saona, P., & Azad, M. A. K. (2022). Do ESG initiatives yield greater firm value and performance? New evidence from European firms. Cogent Business & Management, 9(1), 2144098. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

47. Trahan, R. T., & Jantz, B. (2023). What is ESG? Rethinking the “E” pillar. Business Strategy and the Environment, 32(7), 4382–4391. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

48. Valentinov, V., & Hajdu, A. (2021). Integrating instrumental and normative stakeholder theories: A systems theory approach. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 34(4), 699–712. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

49. Whelan, T., Atz, U., Van Holt, T., & Clark, C. (2021). ESG and financial performance: Uncovering the relationship by aggregating evidence (2015–2020). New York University Stern Center for Sustainable Business Report, 1(1), 1–10. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

50. Wibawa, K. D., & Septianto, T. (2024). Unlocking sustainable development: ASEAN ESG and economic growth implication. Advances in Environmental Innovation, 1(2), 176–188. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

51. Wieczorek-Kosmala, M., Marquardt, D., & Kurpanik, J. (2021). Drivers of sustainable performance in the European energy sector. Energies, 14(21), 7055. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

52. Wielechowski, M., & Krasuski, P. (2024). ESG concepts in business practice: Characteristics and assessment of common ESG frameworks. MAZOWSZE Studia Regionalne (Special Edition 2024), 9–26. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

53. Wong, W. K., Teh, B. H., & Hooi, T. S. (2023). The influence of external stakeholders on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) reporting: Toward a conceptual framework for ESG disclosure. Foresight and STI Governance, 17(1), 45–59. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Methane Emissions from Municipal Solid Waste - Case Study in Cai Rang District, Can Tho City, Vietnam
• Youth Activism, Intentional Integration of Policies to Raise Awareness on Climate Change Action among the Youth
• Breathing Spaces: Environmental & User Experience in Dhanmondi and Zigatola Multistoried Apartments, Dhaka, Bangladesh
• Effects of Solid Waste Disposal on Soil Quality in Makurdi Metropolis, Benue State, Nigeria
• Environmental Impact of Artisanal and Small-Scale Gold Mining in Borgu Local Government Area