Table 8 Summary of clusters from the... | Emerald Publishing

Table 8

Summary of clusters from the bibliometric analysis and content analysis

Clusters	Main references	Main insights
Emerging research themes (from BA)
Cluster 1: The impact of ESG factors on executive compensation structure	Jian and Lee (2015); Li et al. (2016); Dunbar et al. (2020); Karim et al. (2018); Li et al. (2021)	Firms that implement socially responsible practices are more likely to implement long-term compensation, risk-taking incentives, CSR-linked compensation
Cluster 2: The relationship between environmental aspects and executive compensation	Berrone and Gomez-Mejia (2009); Ikram et al. (2023); Stanwick and Stanwick (2001); Campbell et al. (2007); Flammer et al. (2019)	Within the ESG framework, environmental aspects appear related to the executive compensation structure
Cluster 3: The relationship between short-term versus long-term executive compensation and CSR performance	Mahoney and Thorne (2005); Mahoney and Thorn (2006); Sajko et al. (2021); Callan and Thomas (2014); Kang (2017)	CSR is more likely to be positively linked with a long-term oriented compensation and inversely with short-term one
Cluster 4: The effect of ESGBEC on ESG performance	Haque (2017); Haque and Ntim (2020); Adu et al. (2022); Cordova et al. (2021); Derchi et al. (2021); Radu and Smaili (2022)	ESGBEC is likely to improve firms’ ESG performance. However, it may have only a symbolic rather than a substantial impact, especially for environmental performance
Current research themes (from CA)
Cluster 5: Governance and institutional factors as drivers of ESGBEC	Aresu et al. (2023); Hong et al. (2016); Ikram et al. (2023); Li et al. (2021); Liao et al. (2021); Liu et al. (2023); Radu and Smaili (2022); Schiehll and Bellavance (2009); Yang (2023)	ESGBEC is promoted by traditional as well as sustainable features of board of directors’ factors, whilst there is a more complex relationship between ownership structure and ESGBEC
Cluster 6: The impact of executive compensation structure on environmental performance	Adu et al. (2022); Al-Shaer et al. (2023); Benlemlih et al. (2022); Bose et al. (2023); Cohen et al. (2023); Cordova et al. (2021); Crichton et al. (2023); Flammer et al. (2019); Gull et al. (2023); Haque (2017); Haque and Ntim (2020); Hossain et al. (2023); Oyewo (2023)	With reference to carbon emissions, studies have shown that long-term oriented forms of compensation (e.g., ESG pay as well as deferred compensation) tend to have a symbolic rather than substantive impact, unless they are US companies
Cluster 7: The impact of CEO power on the ESG performance	Buchanan et al. (2021); Jiraporn and Chintrakarn (2013); Jouber (2019); Kang (2017); Pucheta-Martínez and Gallego-Álvarez (2021); Rehman and Hamdan (2023); Sajko et al. (2021)	Summarizing, the evidence regarding the impact of CEO power on ESG performance appears to be positive
Cluster 8: The impact of ESGBEC on ESG disclosure	Cordova et al. (2021); Dalla Via and Perego (2020); Haque and Jones (2020); Nandy et al. (2023); Tamimi and Sebastianelli (2017); Velte (2023)	Overall, the authors provided evidence of a positive impact of ESGBEC on ESG disclosure
Cluster 9: The impact of ESGBEC on firm value	Chouaibi et al. (2021); Elbardan et al. (2023); El Ghoul et al. (2011); Flammer et al. (2019); Liu et al. (2023); Mio et al. (2023); Nandy et al. (2023); Ramirez et al. (2022); Zouari-Hadiji and Chouaibi (2021)	In brief, the studies provided mixed evidence of the effect of ESGBE on firm value
Cluster 10: The impact of ESGBEC on financial performance	Bachmann et al. (2020); Cavaco et al. (2020); Cohen et al. (2023); D’Apolito et al. (2019); Khenissi et al. (2022); Tsang et al. (2021)	To summarize, the collective findings suggest limited support for the hypothesis proposing financial benefits for companies from ESGBEC

Clusters	Main references	Main insights
Emerging research themes (from BA)
Cluster 1: The impact of ESG factors on executive compensation structure	Jian and Lee (2015); Li et al. (2016); Dunbar et al. (2020); Karim et al. (2018); Li et al. (2021)	Firms that implement socially responsible practices are more likely to implement long-term compensation, risk-taking incentives, CSR-linked compensation
Cluster 2: The relationship between environmental aspects and executive compensation	Berrone and Gomez-Mejia (2009); Ikram et al. (2023); Stanwick and Stanwick (2001); Campbell et al. (2007); Flammer et al. (2019)	Within the ESG framework, environmental aspects appear related to the executive compensation structure
Cluster 3: The relationship between short-term versus long-term executive compensation and CSR performance	Mahoney and Thorne (2005); Mahoney and Thorn (2006); Sajko et al. (2021); Callan and Thomas (2014); Kang (2017)	CSR is more likely to be positively linked with a long-term oriented compensation and inversely with short-term one
Cluster 4: The effect of ESGBEC on ESG performance	Haque (2017); Haque and Ntim (2020); Adu et al. (2022); Cordova et al. (2021); Derchi et al. (2021); Radu and Smaili (2022)	ESGBEC is likely to improve firms’ ESG performance. However, it may have only a symbolic rather than a substantial impact, especially for environmental performance
Current research themes (from CA)
Cluster 5: Governance and institutional factors as drivers of ESGBEC	Aresu et al. (2023); Hong et al. (2016); Ikram et al. (2023); Li et al. (2021); Liao et al. (2021); Liu et al. (2023); Radu and Smaili (2022); Schiehll and Bellavance (2009); Yang (2023)	ESGBEC is promoted by traditional as well as sustainable features of board of directors’ factors, whilst there is a more complex relationship between ownership structure and ESGBEC
Cluster 6: The impact of executive compensation structure on environmental performance	Adu et al. (2022); Al-Shaer et al. (2023); Benlemlih et al. (2022); Bose et al. (2023); Cohen et al. (2023); Cordova et al. (2021); Crichton et al. (2023); Flammer et al. (2019); Gull et al. (2023); Haque (2017); Haque and Ntim (2020); Hossain et al. (2023); Oyewo (2023)	With reference to carbon emissions, studies have shown that long-term oriented forms of compensation (e.g., ESG pay as well as deferred compensation) tend to have a symbolic rather than substantive impact, unless they are US companies
Cluster 7: The impact of CEO power on the ESG performance	Buchanan et al. (2021); Jiraporn and Chintrakarn (2013); Jouber (2019); Kang (2017); Pucheta-Martínez and Gallego-Álvarez (2021); Rehman and Hamdan (2023); Sajko et al. (2021)	Summarizing, the evidence regarding the impact of CEO power on ESG performance appears to be positive
Cluster 8: The impact of ESGBEC on ESG disclosure	Cordova et al. (2021); Dalla Via and Perego (2020); Haque and Jones (2020); Nandy et al. (2023); Tamimi and Sebastianelli (2017); Velte (2023)	Overall, the authors provided evidence of a positive impact of ESGBEC on ESG disclosure
Cluster 9: The impact of ESGBEC on firm value	Chouaibi et al. (2021); Elbardan et al. (2023); El Ghoul et al. (2011); Flammer et al. (2019); Liu et al. (2023); Mio et al. (2023); Nandy et al. (2023); Ramirez et al. (2022); Zouari-Hadiji and Chouaibi (2021)	In brief, the studies provided mixed evidence of the effect of ESGBE on firm value
Cluster 10: The impact of ESGBEC on financial performance	Bachmann et al. (2020); Cavaco et al. (2020); Cohen et al. (2023); D’Apolito et al. (2019); Khenissi et al. (2022); Tsang et al. (2021)	To summarize, the collective findings suggest limited support for the hypothesis proposing financial benefits for companies from ESGBEC

Source(s): Authors’ own work