Exploring the association of green banking disclosure and corporate sustainable growth: the moderating role of firm size and firm age

Figures & data

Table 1. Operationalisation of variables.

Variable	Operationalization
Dependent variables: Sustainable Growth Rate
Sustainable Growth Rate (SGR)	SGR can be presented with the following formula: SGR = Profit margin $\times$ Asset turnover ratio $\times$ Leverage factor $\times$ Retention ratio (Ul Ain et al., 2022).
Independent variables
Green Banking Disclosure Index (GBDI)	$\frac{{\sum }_{i=1}^{21}{d}_i}{21}$ Score $d_i=1$ if there is disclosure in the company’s annual report or sustainability report Score $d_i=0$ if there is no disclosure in the company’s annual or sustainability report (Bose et al., 2018).
Moderating variables
Firm Size (FSIZE)	Measured as the natural logarithm of the bank’s total assets (Bose et al., 2018).
Firm Age (FAGE)	Measured as the natural logarithm of the number of years since bank incorporation (Bose et al., 2018).
Control variable (bank level)
Return On Assets (ROA)	Pre-tax income is divided by total assets (Muthitacharoen, 2020).
Return On Equity (ROE)	Pre-tax income is divided by total equity (Yoon et al., 2021).
Dividend Payout Ratio (DPR)	Dividend per share divided by earnings per share (Sanoran, 2023).
Control variable (macroeconomic level)
Inflation rate (INF)	GDP per capita growth (annual %) (Le & Ngo, 2020; Petria et al., 2015).
GDP Growth (GDPGR)	Inflation, GDP deflator (annual %) (Le & Ngo, 2020; Petria et al., 2015).

Table 2. Descriptive statistics.

Variable	n	Mean	S.D	Min	0.25	Mdn	0.75	Max
SGR	578	7.20	23.75	−205.72	1.09	8.11	15.67	135.50
GBDI	578	0.39	0.38	0.00	0.00	0.76	0.76	0.90
ROA	578	0.01	0.06	−1.30	0.00	0.01	0.02	0.09
ROE	578	0.07	0.30	−3.53	0.02	0.07	0.14	4.74
DPR	578	18.06	39.28	−4.21	0.00	0.00	26.01	454.67
INFL	578	4.88	2.55	1.56	3.20	4.28	6.39	13.11
GDPGR	578	4.72	2.03	−2.07	4.88	5.07	5.69	6.35
FSIZE	578	24.09	1.82	18.31	22.76	23.98	25.51	28.18
FAGE	578	3.73	0.54	1.95	3.30	3.81	4.08	4.84

Table 3. Variance inflation factor.

Variable	VIF	1/VIF
INFL	1.47	0.677969
ROE	1.31	0.762667
GDPGR	1.3	0.766611
ROA	1.29	0.774072
GBDI	1.26	0.791664
DPR	1.02	0.979903
Mean VIF	1.28

Table 4. Correlation matrix.

Variables	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)	(6)	(7)	(8)	(9)
(1) SGR	1.000
(2) GBDI	−0.095*	1.000
	(0.022)
(3) ROA	0.214*	0.020	1.000
	(0.000)	(0.639)
(4) ROE	0.407*	−0.064	−0.464*	1.000
	(0.000)	(0.126)	(0.000)
(5) DPR	0.022	0.051	0.065	0.064	1.000
	(0.596)	(0.222)	(0.117)	(0.126)
(6) INFL	−0.052	0.442*	0.044	−0.108*	−0.005	1.000
	(0.210)	(0.000)	(0.286)	(0.009)	(0.905)
(7) GDPGR	−0.020	0.292*	0.010	−0.116*	−0.031	0.466*	1.000
	(0.638)	(0.000)	(0.809)	(0.005)	(0.458)	(0.000)
(8) FSIZE	0.264*	0.313*	0.155*	0.129*	0.242*	0.453*	0.297*	1.000
	(0.000)	(0.000)	(0.000)	(0.002)	(0.000)	(0.000)	(0.000)
(9) FAGE	0.152*	0.179*	0.132*	0.041	0.067	0.259*	0.161*	0.472*	1.000
	(0.000)	(0.000)	(0.002)	(0.328)	(0.107)	(0.000)	(0.000)	(0.000)

This table presents the pairwise correlation coefficients between the variables used for hypothesis testing (p-values are in parentheses), and the * indicates significance at the 10% level.

Table 5. Regression results.

	Model 1	Model 2	Model 3	Model 4	Model 5
	CEM	FEM	REM	FEM	FEM
GBDI	−5.054**	−7.953***	−5.054**	−50.05	−36.70
	(−2.21)	(−2.65)	(−2.21)	(−1.07)	(−1.55)
GBDI*FSIZE				1.600
				(0.85)
FSIZE				4.658**
				(2.60)
GBDI*FAGE					7.674
					(1.27)
FAGE					−4.095
					(−0.50)
ROE	51.15***	43.66***	51.15***	43.78***	43.56***
	(17.44)	(13.37)	(17.44)	(4.44)	(4.43)
ROA	212.3***	157.7***	212.3***	157.7***	159.4***
	(13.99)	(9.09)	(13.99)	(5.11)	(5.17)
DPR	−0.0286	−0.0558**	−0.0286	−0.0596***	−0.0583***
	(−1.43)	(−2.52)	(−1.43)	(−4.33)	(−3.36)
INFL	−0.0351	−0.192	−0.0351	−0.919	−0.210
	(−0.09)	(−0.49)	(−0.09)	(−0.97)	(−0.26)
GDPGR	0.877**	0.847*	0.877**	0.417	0.889*
	(2.00)	(1.96)	(2.00)	(1.07)	(1.90)
_cons	0.826	4.198*	0.826	−101.3**	19.18
	(0.38)	(1.84)	(0.38)	(−2.49)	(0.66)
N	578	578	578	578	578
R^2-Adj	0.378	0.221		0.292	0.280
F_Stat	59.43	35.32		12.67	11.45
Prob > F	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000
Chow Test	Prob > F = 0.0091 (Fixed Effect Model)
LM Test	Prob > chibar2 = 1.0000 (Random Effect Model)
Hausman Test	Prob > chi2 = 0.0013 (Fixed Effect Model)

The table displays the regression outcomes that investigate the effect of green banking disclosure on sustainable growth rate regarding the moderating influence of firm age and size. Models 1, 2, and 3 use the equation. ${\mathit{\text{SGR}}}_{i,d}={\beta }_0+{\beta }_1{\mathit{\text{GBDI}}}_{i,d}+{\beta }_2{\phi }_{i,d}+ϵ$, Models 4 uses the equation ${\mathit{\text{SGR}}}_{i,d}={\beta }_0+{\beta }_1{\mathit{\text{GBDI}}}_{i,d}+{\beta }_2{\mathit{\text{FSIZE}}}_{i,d}+{\beta }_3\mathit{\text{GBDI}}*{\mathit{\text{FSIZE}}}_{i,d}+{\beta }_4{\phi }_{i,d}+ϵ$, and Models 5 use the equation ${\mathit{\text{SGR}}}_{i,d}={\beta }_0+{\beta }_1{\mathit{\text{GBDI}}}_{i,d}+{\beta }_2{\mathit{\text{FAGE}}}_{i,d}+{\beta }_3\mathit{\text{GBDI}}*{\mathit{\text{FAGE}}}_{i,d}+{\beta }_4{\phi }_{i,d}+ϵ$. The variable ${\phi }_{i,d}$ is a control variable that comprises factors such as Return-on-Assets (ROA), Return-on-Equity (ROE), Dividend Payout Ratio (DPR), inflation rate (INF), and GDP growth (GDPGR). The table includes regression coefficients and t-statistics $\left(\frac{b}{t_{\mathit{\text{stat}}}}\right)$. Robust regressions have been presented to account for heteroscedasticity and autocorrelation. t Statistics in parentheses. The significance levels are denoted by ***, **, and *, corresponding to 1%, 5%, and 10% respectively. *p < 0.1, **p < 0.05, ***p < 0.01.

Table 6. Regression results.

	NONSOE	SOE	NONSOE	SOE	NONSOE	SOE
	Model a	Model b	Model c	Model d	Model e	Model f
GBDI	−5.931	−44.04	−36.16	−51.83**	−18.04	−51.01***
	(−0.16)	(−0.55)	(−1.46)	(−2.45)	(−1.07)	(−2.82)
GBDI*FSIZE	−0.0571	1.705
	(−0.04)	(0.53)
FSIZE	2.076***	2.508			1.887**	2.336
	(2.78)	(0.71)			(2.55)	(1.32)
GBDI*FAGE			8.141	12.52**
			(1.23)	(2.50)
FAGE			0.330	−4.790	−1.247	−4.218
			(0.20)	(−1.34)	(−0.89)	(−1.35)
GBDI*FSIZE*FAGE					0.124	0.483***
					(0.66)	(2.82)
ROE	46.24***	152.4***	47.97***	95.70***	46.14***	135.6***
	(4.64)	(3.15)	(4.87)	(2.66)	(4.65)	(4.10)
ROA	190.9***	−525.7	198.6***	268.8	191.1***	−322.4
	(5.81)	(−1.24)	(6.14)	(0.97)	(5.84)	(−0.80)
DPR	−0.0351**	−0.0849***	−0.0212	−0.0828***	−0.0341*	−0.0934***
	(−2.06)	(−3.57)	(−1.37)	(−4.78)	(−1.96)	(−4.36)
INFL	−0.717	−0.235	−0.470	0.509	−0.777	−0.257
	(−1.03)	(−0.36)	(−0.73)	(1.23)	(−1.10)	(−0.43)
GDPGR	0.584	1.124***	0.789*	1.549**	0.607	1.243**
	(1.41)	(2.89)	(1.78)	(2.62)	(1.46)	(2.46)
_cons	−43.32***	−64.14	1.724	10.33	−34.25**	−44.75
	(−2.72)	(−0.79)	(0.31)	(0.64)	(−2.12)	(−1.20)
N	499	79	499	79	499	79
R^2-Adj	0.378	0.499	0.371	0.541	0.378	0.573
F_Stat	16.84	13.56	9.069	17.46	18.47	17.36
Prob > F	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000

This table presents the results of a robust Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regression analysis investigating the effect of green banking disclosure on sustainable growth rate concerning the moderating influence of firm age and firm size. Models a and b use the equation ${\mathit{\text{SGR}}}_{i,d}={\beta }_0+{\beta }_1{\mathit{\text{GBDI}}}_{i,d}+{\beta }_2{\mathit{\text{FSIZE}}}_{i,d}+{\beta }_3\mathit{\text{GBDI}}*{\mathit{\text{FSIZE}}}_{i,d}+{\beta }_4{\phi }_{i,d}+ϵ$, Models c and d use the equation ${\mathit{\text{SGR}}}_{i,d}={\beta }_0+{\beta }_1{\mathit{\text{GBDI}}}_{i,d}+{\beta }_2{\mathit{\text{FAGE}}}_{i,d}+{\beta }_3\mathit{\text{GBDI}}*{\mathit{\text{FAGE}}}_{i,d}+{\beta }_4{\phi }_{i,d}+ϵ$, and Models e and f ${\mathit{\text{SGR}}}_{i,d}={\beta }_0+{\beta }_1{\mathit{\text{GBDI}}}_{i,d}+{\beta }_2{\mathit{\text{FAGE}}}_{i,d}+{\beta }_3{\mathit{\text{FSIZE}}}_{i,d}+{\beta }_4\mathit{\text{GBDI}}*\mathit{\text{FSIZE}}*{\mathit{\text{FAGE}}}_{i,d}+{\beta }_5{\phi }_{i,d}+ϵ$. The variable ${\phi }_{i,d}$ is a control variable that comprises factors such as Return-on-Assets (ROA), Return-on-Equity (ROE), Dividend Payout Ratio (DPR), inflation rate (INF), and GDP growth (GDPGR). The table includes regression coefficients and t-statistics $\left(\frac{b}{t_{\mathit{\text{stat}}}}\right)$. Robust regressions have been presented to account for heteroscedasticity and autocorrelation. t Statistics in parentheses. The significance levels are denoted by ***, **, and *, corresponding to 1%, 5%, and 10% respectively. *p < 0.1, **p < 0.05, ***p < 0.01.

Table 7. Regression results.

	CEM	FEM	REM	CEM	CEM	CEM
	SGR2	SGR2	SGR2	SGR2	SGR2	SGR2
GBDI	−0.0591**	−0.0816***	−0.0662**	−0.236	−0.297	−0.159
	(−2.46)	(−3.04)	(−2.37)	(−0.84)	(−1.59)	(−1.32)
GBDI*FSIZE				0.00666
				(0.62)
FSIZE				0.0293***		0.0275***
				(5.32)		(4.54)
GBDI*FAGE					0.0626
					(1.40)
FAGE					0.0277**	0.0117
					(2.19)	(1.14)
GBDI*FAGE*FSIZE						0.000909
						(0.83)
ROE	0.224*	0.117	0.175	0.167	0.206*	0.165
	(1.81)	(0.86)	(1.40)	(1.32)	(1.66)	(1.31)
ROA	2.154***	1.653***	1.933***	1.896***	2.060***	1.883***
	(6.66)	(5.07)	(7.87)	(5.73)	(6.32)	(5.68)
DPR	0.000373**	−0.000121	0.000146	0.0000750	0.000324**	0.0000817
	(2.11)	(−1.23)	(1.23)	(0.83)	(2.14)	(0.87)
INFL	−0.000728	−0.00443**	−0.00266*	−0.00934***	−0.00375*	−0.00954***
	(−0.55)	(−2.15)	(−1.84)	(−2.89)	(−1.93)	(−3.06)
GDPGR	0.00457	0.00351	0.00408	0.000914	0.00392	0.000970
	(0.82)	(0.84)	(0.85)	(0.21)	(0.76)	(0.22)
_cons	0.0521***	0.103***	0.0714***	−0.577***	−0.0314	−0.579***
	(3.23)	(9.63)	(4.46)	(−4.72)	(−0.62)	(−4.17)
N	578	578	578	578	578	578
R^2-Adj	0.511	0.439		0.592	0.542	0.596
F_Stat	37.12	78.73		102.9	46.06	94.52
Prob > F	0.0000	0.0000	0.0000	0.0000	0.0000	0.0000

t Statistics in parentheses. *p < 0.1, **p < 0.05, ***p < 0.01.

Ul Ain, Q., Yuan, X., Mustansar Javaid, H., & Naeem, M. (2022). Board gender diversity and sustainable growth rate: Chinese evidence. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 35(1), 1364–1384. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2021.1965002

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Bose, S., Khan, H. Z., Rashid, A., & Islam, S. (2018). What drives green banking disclosure? An institutional and corporate governance perspective. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 35(2), 501–527. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-017-9528-x

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Muthitacharoen, A. (2020). Assessing tax burden differential between foreign multinationals and local firms: Implications for FDI tax incentives. Puey Ungphakorn Institute for Economic Research.

 Google Scholar

Yoon, B., Lee, J.-H., & Cho, J.-H. (2021). The effect of ESG performance on tax avoidance—Evidence from Korea. Sustainability, 13(12), 6729. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13126729

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Sanoran, K. (2023). Corporate sustainability and sustainable growth: The role of industry sensitivity. Finance Research Letters, 53, 103596. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2022.103596

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Le, T. D., & Ngo, T. (2020). The determinants of bank profitability: A cross-country analysis. Central Bank Review, 20(2), 65–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cbrev.2020.04.001

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Petria, N., Capraru, B., & Ihnatov, I. (2015). Determinants of banks’ profitability: Evidence from EU 27 banking systems. Procedia Economics and Finance, 20(15), 518–524. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2212-5671(15)00104-5

 Google Scholar

Data availability statement

Data supporting this study are openly available from https://www.idx.co.id/id.