Too dark to see: Does board governance moderate the relationship between carbon emissions and analyst forecast errors?

Abstract

AbstractThis study aims to demonstrate that carbon emissions may increase analyst forecast errors because poor environmental performance obscures prospects for business operations. We further examine whether strong board governance moderates such a relationship. Using a sample of S&P 500 firms from the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP), we employ Heckman's two‐stage model to examine our research questions. We find a positive association between carbon intensity and forecast errors, but strong board governance, captured by board independence, board diligence, and committee size, may mitigate this positive relationship. However, the effect is amplified for firms engaged in controversial governance practices such as CEO duality and long CEO tenure. Our study provides insight for managers by raising concerns due to high levels of carbon emissions and demonstrating that different governance characteristics may alleviate the adverse effect of carbon emissions on forecast errors.