Article Sidebar

Download
Full text PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 163 Download : 120

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

This study examines the effect of ESG performance on dividend policy and analyzes the moderating role of family ownership in Indonesian non-financial firms. Using a quantitative approach, multiple linear and moderated regression analyses were conducted on data from 208 firms listed on the IDX between 2019 and 2023, sourced from OSIRIS, Bloomberg, and company reports through purposive sampling. The findings show that ESG performance positively and significantly affects dividend policy, supporting stakeholder theory that emphasizes corporate responsibility and long-term stability. However, family ownership weakens this positive relationship, aligning with agency theory’s Type II conflict between controlling and minority shareholders. These results suggest that regulators, investors, and managers should consider ownership structure when developing dividend and sustainability policies. This study contributes novel empirical evidence by integrating ESG performance, dividend policy, and family ownership within a single framework in Indonesia’s emerging market, where family control remains prevalent.

Keywords

Dividend Policy ESG Performance Family Ownership Stakeholder Theory Agency Theory

Article Details

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Jurnal Akuntansi dan Auditing Indonesia

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).

References

  1. Aguinis, H., & Stone-Romero, E. F. (1997). Methodological artifacts in moderated multiple regression and their effects on statistical power. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(1), 192–206. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.82.1.192 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037//0021-9010.82.1.192
  2. Alchian, A., & Demsetz, H. (1972). Production, information costs, and economic organization. American Economic Review, 62(5), 777–795. https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:aea:aecrev:v:62:y:1972:i:5:p:777-95
  3. Almulhim, A. A., Aljughaiman, A. A., Al Barrak, T., Chebbi, K., & Amin, N. (2024). The power of ESG in shaping dividend policy: Illuminating the role of financial sustainability in an emerging market. PLOS ONE, 19(12), e0312290. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0312290 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0312290
  4. Amess, K., Banerji, S., & Lampousis, A. (2015). Corporate cash holdings: Causes and consequences. International Review of Financial Analysis, 42, 421–433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2015.09.007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2015.09.007
  5. Attig, N., El Ghoul, S., Guedhami, O., & Zheng, X. (2021). Dividends and economic policy uncertainty: International evidence. Journal of Corporate Finance, 66, 101785. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2020.101785 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2020.101785
  6. Babbage, N. (2020). Who cares? Who does? The increased opportunity in environmental concern. https://www.kantar.com/inspiration/fmcg/who-cares-who-does-the-increased-opportunity-in-environmental-concern
  7. Badru, B. O., & Qasem, A. (2024). Corporate social responsibility and dividend payments in the Malaysian capital market: The interacting effect of family-controlled companies. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 14(2), 283–306. https://doi.org/10.1080/20430795.2021.1979926 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/20430795.2021.1979926
  8. Barnett, M. L., & Salomon, R. M. (2006). Beyond dichotomy: the curvilinear relationship between social responsibility and financial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 27(11), 1101–1122. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.557 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.557
  9. Benlemlih, M. (2019). Corporate social responsibility and dividend policy. Research in International Business and Finance, 47, 114–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2018.07.005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2018.07.005
  10. Berman, S. L., Wicks, A. C., Kotha, S., & Jones, T. M. (1999). Does stakeholder orientation matter? The relationship between stakeholder management models and firm financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 42(5), 488–506. https://doi.org/10.2307/256972 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/256972
  11. Brigham, E. F., & Ehrhardt, M. C. (2016). Financial management: Theory and practice (15th ed.). Cengage Learning.
  12. Brigham, E. F., & Houston, J. F. (2011). Dasar-Dasar Manajemen Keuangan (11th ed.). Salemba Empat.
  13. Buertey, S., Sun, E., Lee, J. S., & Hwang, J. (2020). Corporate social responsibility and earnings management: The moderating effect of corporate governance mechanisms. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27(1), 256–271. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1803 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1803
  14. Calabrò, A., Torchia, M., Gomez‐Mejia, L. R., Pongelli, C., & Lohe, F. (2025). What are family firms all about? Advancing family business research through socioemotional wealth theory. Journal of Management Studies. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.13263 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.13263
  15. Cao, H., Cheng, C. S. A., Li, X. F., & Zhang, J. J. (2025). Creditor rights, conflict of interest among creditors, and borrowers’ accounting conservatism: Evidence from anti-recharacterization laws. Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance. https://doi.org/10.1177/0148558X251317353 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0148558X251317353
  16. Cappellieri, F., Vinciguerra, R., Ricciardi, A., & Pizzo, M. (2025). Independent minority directors against self-serving and manipulative practices in non-financial reporting. Journal of Management and Governance, 29(2), 453–501. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-024-09722-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-024-09722-y
  17. Chen, X., Li, W., Torsin, W., & Tsang, A. (2024). Dividend policy under mandatory ESG reporting. Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, 93, 101986. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intfin.2024.101986 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intfin.2024.101986
  18. Cheung, A. (Waikong), Hu, M., & Schwiebert, J. (2018). Corporate social responsibility and dividend policy. Accounting & Finance, 58(3), 787–816. https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.12238 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.12238
  19. Dahiya, M., Singh, S., & Chaudhry, N. (2023). Corporate social responsibility and dividend policy in India. Management Decision, 61(10), 3144–3168. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-08-2022-1152 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-08-2022-1152
  20. DeAngelo, H., DeAngelo, L., & Stulz, R. M. (2006). Dividend policy and the earned/contributed capital mix: A test of the life-cycle theory. Journal of Financial Economics, 81(2), 227–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2005.07.005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2005.07.005
  21. Delgado-García, J. B., Blanco-Mazagatos, V., Romero-Merino, M. E., & Díaz-Portugal, C. (2023). Family CEO affect and R&D investments of family firms: The moderation effect of family ownership structure. Long Range Planning, 56(5), 102230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2022.102230 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2022.102230
  22. Demsetz, H., & Lehn, K. (1985). The structure of corporate ownership: Causes and consequences. In Source: Journal of Political Economy (Vol. 93, Issue 6). https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1532067 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/261354
  23. Dewi, N. S. (2022). Riset! 70% Perusahaan Keluarga di Indonesia Tidak Mampu Bertahan Hingga Generasi Kedua. Digination.Id. https://www.digination.id/read/017965/riset-70-perusahaan-keluarga-di-indonesia-tidak-mampu-bertahan-hingga-generasi-kedua
  24. Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. The Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65. https://doi.org/10.2307/258887 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/258887
  25. Ellili, N. O. D. (2022). Impact of environmental, social and governance disclosure on dividend policy: What is the role of corporate governance? Evidence from an emerging market. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 29(5), 1396–1413. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2277 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2277
  26. Fama, E. F., & French, K. R. (2001). Disappearing dividends: changing firm characteristics or lower propensity to pay? Journal of Financial Economics, 60(1), 3–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-405X(01)00038-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-405X(01)00038-1
  27. Freeman, R. E. (2010). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach (Reprint (1984)). Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139192675
  28. Gill, A., & Shah, C. (2011). Determinants of corporate cash holdings: Evidence from Canada. International Journal of Economics and Finance, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.5539/ijef.v4n1p70 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/ijef.v4n1p70
  29. Gilson, R. J., & Gordon, J. N. (2003). Controlling controlling shareholders. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 152(2), 785–843. https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/penn_law_review/vol152/iss2/8?utm_source=chatgpt.com DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3313035
  30. Gitman, L. J., & Zutter, C. J. (2012). Principles of managerial finance. Pearson Prentice Hall.
  31. Gómez-Mejía, L. R., Chirico, F., Withers, M. C., Martin, G. P., & Wiseman, R. M. (2025). Are family owners willing to risk “rocking the boat”? A blended socioemotional wealth-implicit theory framework. Journal of Management. https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063241311865 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063241311865
  32. Ionita, C., & Dinu, E. (2021). The effect of intangible assets on sustainable growth and firm value – Evidence on intellectual capital investment in companies listed on Bucharest Stock Exchange. Kybernetes, 50(10), 2823–2849. https://doi.org/10.1108/K-05-2020-0325 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/K-05-2020-0325
  33. J. Lusk, E., & Wells, M. (2021). Bloomberg’s esg governance iss: quality score [gqs]: Vetting results of a taxonomic sorting trial. International Journal of Scientific and Management Research, 04(05), 97–105. https://doi.org/10.37502/IJSMR.2021.4505 DOI: https://doi.org/10.37502/IJSMR.2021.4505
  34. Jansen, K., Michiels, A., Voordeckers, W., & Steijvers, T. (2023). Financing decisions in private family firms: a family firm pecking order. Small Business Economics, 61(2), 495–515. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-022-00711-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-022-00711-9
  35. Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X
  36. Jiang, F., & Ma, J. (2025). Do creditors value board ownership representativeness? Evidence from trade credit: A pre-registered report. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 93, 102840. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pacfin.2025.102840 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pacfin.2025.102840
  37. Jones, T. M. (1995). Instrumental stakeholder theory: A synthesis of ethics and economics. Academy of Management Review, 20(2), 404–437. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9507312924 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/258852
  38. Kalia, A. (2025). Gender diversity in boardroom and dividend payouts: exploring the moderating role of family businesses in India. Corporate Governance. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-08-2024-0434 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-08-2024-0434
  39. KOMDIGI. (2024, August 11). Indonesia Salip Vietnam dan Malaysia, Jadi Tujuan Investasi Digital Terbesar Kedua di ASEAN. Kementerian Komunikasi Dan Digital. https://www.komdigi.go.id/berita/ekonomi-digital/detail/indonesia-salip-vietnam-dan-malaysia-jadi-tujuan-investasi-digital-terbesar-kedua-di-asean
  40. La Porta, R., Lopez‐De‐Silanes, F., & Shleifer, A. (1999). Corporate ownership around the world. The Journal of Finance, 54(2), 471–517. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-1082.00115 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-1082.00115
  41. La Porta, R., Lopez‐de‐Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (2000). Agency problems and dividend policies around the world. The Journal of Finance, 55(1), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-1082.00199 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-1082.00199
  42. Laksana, R. D., Shaferi, I., & Naznii, H. (2024). The impact of independent directors and family control on the dividend policy and capital structure: A family business strategy. Corporate and Business Strategy Review, 5(3), 168–175. https://doi.org/10.22495/cbsrv5i3art16 DOI: https://doi.org/10.22495/cbsrv5i3art16
  43. Margaretha, S. P. D. I. (2020). Faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi cash holding pada perusahaan manufaktur. Jurnal Paradigma Akuntansi, 2(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.24912/jpa.v2i1.7127 DOI: https://doi.org/10.24912/jpa.v2i1.7127
  44. Matos, P. V., Barros, V., & Miranda Sarmento, J. (2020). Does esg affect the stability of dividend policies in europe? Sustainability, 12(21), 8804. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12218804 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su12218804
  45. Miller, N. (n.d.). ESG Score. https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com
  46. OJK. (2023). Joint Press Release: Accelerate Renewable Energy Transition Strengthens Economic Growth. Indonesia Financial Services Authority. https://ojk.go.id/en/berita-dan-kegiatan/siaran-pers/Pages/Accelerate-Renewable-Energy-Transition-Strengthens-Economic-Growth.aspx
  47. Opler, T., Pinkowitz, L., Stulz, R., & Williamson, R. (1999). The determinants and implications of corporate cash holdings. Journal of Financial Economics, 52(1), 3–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-405X(99)00003-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-405X(99)00003-3
  48. Philips, R., Freeman, R. E., & Wicks, A. C. (2003). What stakeholder theory is not. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13(4). https://www.jstor.org/stable/3857968 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/beq200313434
  49. Pramesti, W. C., Sudarma, M., & Ghofar, A. (2024). Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) disclosure, intellectual capital and firm value: The moderating role of financial performance. Jurnal Reviu Akuntansi Dan Keuangan, 14(1), 103–121. https://doi.org/10.22219/jrak.v14i1.32849 DOI: https://doi.org/10.22219/jrak.v14i1.32849
  50. Rodrigues, P. P., Pai, P. K., Joshi, H. G., & Prabhu, K. P. N. (2025). Influence of socio-emotional wealth on entrepreneurial orientation in family firms: A bibliometric analysis and systematic review. Business Perspectives and Research, 13(2), 206–225. https://doi.org/10.1177/22785337221098484 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/22785337221098484
  51. Ross, S. A. (1973). The economic theory of agency: The principal’s problem. The American Economic Review, 63(2), 134–139. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1817064
  52. Sarturi, G., Barakat, S. R., & Gomes, R. C. (2025). Stakeholder theory in the public sector domain: A bibliometric analysis and future research agenda. Review of Policy Research, 42(3), 736–756. https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12560 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12560
  53. Shah, A., & Shome, S. (2025). CSR spending and corporate dividend decision in India: evaluating firm’s legitimacy in stakeholders’ engrossment. South Asian Journal of Business Studies. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAJBS-12-2023-0435 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/SAJBS-12-2023-0435
  54. Sheikh, M. F., Bhutta, A. I., Rehman, B., Bazil, M., & Hassan, A. (2022). Corporate social responsibility and dividend policy: a strategic choice in family firms. Journal of Family Business Management, 12(2), 296–315. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFBM-10-2020-0096 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JFBM-10-2020-0096
  55. Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1997). A survey of corporate governance. The Journal of Finance, 52(2), 737–783. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1997.tb04820.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1997.tb04820.x
  56. Sikalidis, A., Bozos, K., Chantziaras, A., & Grose, C. (2022). Influences of family ownership on dividend policy under mandatory dividend rules. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 59(3), 939–967. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11156-022-01064-w DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11156-022-01064-w
  57. Sindhuja, P. N. (2010). Performance and value creation: Family managed business versus non-family managed business. The IUP Journal of Business Strategy, 6(3), 45–65.
  58. Smith, A. (2019). The Wealth of Nations. Courier Dover Publications.
  59. S&P Global. (2020). The ESG Risk Atlas: Sector and Regional Rationales and Scores. https://www.spglobal.com/content/dam/spglobal/mi/en/documents/general/TheESGRiskAtlasSectorAndRegionalRationalesAndScores_July-22-2020.pdf
  60. Truong, T. H. D. (2025). Environmental, social and governance performance and firm value: does ownership concentration matter? Management Decision, 63(2), 488–511. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-10-2023-1993 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-10-2023-1993
  61. van der Laan Smith, J., Adhikari, A., & Tondkar, R. H. (2005). Exploring differences in social disclosures internationally: A stakeholder perspective. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 24(2), 123–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2004.12.007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2004.12.007
  62. Veltri, S., Bruni, M. E., Iazzolino, G., Morea, D., & Baldissarro, G. (2023). Do ESG factors improve utilities corporate efficiency and reduce the risk perceived by credit lending institutions? An empirical analysis. Utilities Policy, 81, 101520. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jup.2023.101520 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jup.2023.101520
  63. Wei, X., & Chen, L. (2022). Dispersion of family ownership and innovation input in family firms. Sustainability, 14(14), 8418. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14148418 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su14148418
  64. Yusra, I., Hadya, R., & Fatmasari, R. (2019). The effect of retained earnings on dividend policy from the perspective of life cycle. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Life, Innovation, Change and Knowledge (ICLICK 2018). https://doi.org/10.2991/iclick-18.2019.44 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2991/iclick-18.2019.44
  65. Zadeh, M. H. (2021). The effect of corporate social responsibility transparency on corporate payout policies. International Journal of Managerial Finance, 17(5), 708–732. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMF-07-2020-0386 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMF-07-2020-0386
  66. Zahid, R. M. A., Taran, A., Khan, M. K., & Chersan, I.-C. (2023). ESG, dividend payout policy and the moderating role of audit quality: Empirical evidence from Western Europe. Borsa Istanbul Review, 23(2), 350–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bir.2022.10.012 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bir.2022.10.012