Clustering Companies by Sustainability Behavior: A Comparative Study between Industrial and Non-Industrial Sectors
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
บทคัดย่อ
This study aims to classify the sustainability behavior of companies listed on the Stock Exchange of Thailand using cluster analysis to reflect the level of ESG maturity and compare it between industries and non-industries. The sample consisted of 503 companies in 2023. Variables used for clustering included Sustainability Disclosure Score (GRI Score), Corporate Governance Scores (CG Score), Return on Equity (ROE), and Financial Risk (D/A Ratio). Industry type was excluded from the clustering model and analyzed later.
Analysis using Partitioning Around Medoids and Gower distance revealed that companies could be classified into three groups: low ESG levels, medium ESG levels, and high ESG levels. Statistical tests confirmed significant differences in GRI scores and corporate governance quality between groups, while ROE and financial risk levels did not. Furthermore, a weak linear relationship was observed between groups and industry type. Theoretically, the research supports institutional and stakeholder theories, indicating that differences in sustainability stem more from governance quality and disclosure ability than from financial factors. This research offers policy recommendations for designing appropriate ESG promotion measures based on the readiness of organizations in the Thai capital market.
Article Details
อนุญาตภายใต้เงื่อนไข Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
บทความที่จะตีพิมพ์เพื่อเผยแพร่ในวารสารการจัดการธุรกิจ มหาวิทยาลัยบูรพา จะต้องเป็นบทความที่ไม่เคยได้รับการตีพิมพ์เผยแพร่หรืออยู่ระหว่างการพิจารณาเพื่อตีพิมพ์เผยแพร่ในวารสารอื่น ๆ ทั้งนี้ หากพบว่ามีการละเมิดลิขสิทธิ์ ด้วยข้อคิดเห็นที่ปรากฏและแสดงในเนื้อหาบทความต่าง ๆ ให้ถือว่าเป็นความเห็นและความรับผิดชอบโดยตรงของผู้เขียนบทความนั้น ๆ มิใช่ความเห็นและความรับผิดชอบใด ๆ ของคณะบริหารธุรกิจ มหาวิทยาลัยบูรพา สำหรับในกรณีผู้ประสงค์จะนำข้อความในวารสารการจัดการธุรกิจ มหาวิทยาลัยบูรพา ไปเผยแพร่ต้องได้รับอนุญาตจากกองบรรณาธิการวารสารการจัดการธุรกิจ มหาวิทยาลัยบูรพา ตามกฎหมายว่าด้วยลิขสิทธิ์
เอกสารอ้างอิง
Amorelli, M., & García-Sánchez, I. M. (2021). Trends in the dynamic evolution of board gender diversity and corporate social responsibility. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 28(1), 1-18.
Baumgartner, K. T., Ernst, C. A., & Fischer, T. M. (2022). How corporate reputation disclosures affect stakeholders' behavioral intentions: Mediating mechanisms of perceived organizational performance and corporate reputation. Journal of Business Ethics, 175(2), 361–389.
Chancharat, N., Krishnamra, P. , & Suriyamanee, N. (2022). Sustainability reporting and firm performance: Evidence from non-financial listed companies in Thailand. Journal of Accounting and Finance Research, 14(1), 45-62.
Charoenrat, T., & Amornkitvikai, Y. (2021). Industry differences, regulatory pressure, and sustainability disclosure among Thai listed companies. Asian Journal of Sustainability and Social Responsibility, 6(1), 1-20.
Della Torre, E., Mango, F., & Rizzo, F. (2022). ESG profiles and corporate strategies: A cluster analysis approach. Journal of Cleaner Production, 35(2), 344-369.
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147-160.
Eccles, R. G., & Klimenko, S. (2019). The investor revolution. Harvard Business Review, 97(3), 106-116.
Eccles, R. G., Loannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2014). The impact of corporate sustainability on organizational processes and performance. Management Science, 60(11), 2835-2857.
Fernando, G. D., & Lawrence, S. A. (2014). Corporate social responsibility disclosures: The importance of ownership and industry type. Journal of Applied Accounting Research, 15(2), 200-223.
Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Pearson.
Husted, B. W., & de Sousa-Filho, J. M. (2022). Board governance and ESG assurance. Business & Society, 61(4), 923-952.
Kim, E. H., & Lyon, T. (2023). Industry environmental pressure and ESG behavior. Organization Science, 34(2), 345-362.
KPMG. (2022). The time has come: The KPMG survey of sustainability reporting 2022. Retrieved November 11, 2025, from https://home.kpmg/xx/en/home/insights/2022/11/the-time-has-come-survey-of-sustainability-reporting.html.
Li, T., Li, S., & Minor, D. (2021). Corporate ESG performance and industry-level institutional pressures: Evidence from global markets. Journal of Cleaner Production, 28(1), 125-145.
Liu, X., & Wu, J. (2023). Corporate ESG heterogeneity: A cluster analysis approach. Sustainability, 15(10), 7895.
Mallin, C. A. (2019). Corporate governance (6th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Winit, W., Ekasingh, E., & Sampet, J. (2023). How disclosure types of sustainability performance impact consumers' relationship quality and firm reputation. Sustainability, 15(1), 1-18.
Stock Exchange of Thailand. (2023). Thailand sustainability investment report 2023. SET Press.
Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571-610.
Zhuang, Y., Chang, X., & Lee, Y. (2021). Industry characteristics and ESG disclosure. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 12(5), 985-1007.
