ArticlePloS one2025
SET ESG ratings and firm value: The new sustainability performance assessment tool in Thailand.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigates the influence of SET ESG ratings on firm value of companies listed on the Stock Exchange of Thailand (SET), emphasizing the multifaceted relationships between ESG performance, third-party evaluations, and market reactions following SET ESG ratings announcements. The findings reveal that firms with higher SET ESG ratings experience significant enhancements in firm value due to their superior management of environmental and social risks, which reduces regulatory and reputational threats. Furthermore, the research uncovers the nuanced role of third-party ESG evaluations, indicating that while endorsements from reputable sources can amplify the positive effects of SET ESG ratings, more or conflicting assessments can lead to diminished firm value. Specifically, a single strong endorsement markedly enhances firm value, whereas evaluations from two to three third parties may introduce confusion, leading to increased information asymmetry. This finding challenges the assumption that multiple endorsements always translate to greater value, emphasizing the need for firms to strategically select their evaluators to optimize market perceptions. Moreover, the study illustrates that announcements of SET ESG ratings result in immediate and sustained increases in firm value, highlighting ESG performance as a critical determinant of long-term viability in the eyes of investors. These results provide actionable guidance for investors and policymakers, advocating for the integration of robust ESG practices to enhance market confidence and drive long-term value creation. This research contributes to the existing literature by elucidating the intricate dynamics between SET ESG ratings, third-party evaluations, and firm value, thereby offering valuable perspectives for firms navigating a sustainability-focused landscape.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.