The Social Dimension of ESG and Gender Differences: a Cross-Country Analysis

In the context of the institutionalization of the sustainable development agenda and the strengthening of corporate social responsibility requirements, the analysis of social and gender differences in ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance) attitudes is of particular importance. The aim of the study is to identify gender differences in ESG socio-value attitudes and to determine the role of the national context in moderating these differences at the crosscountry level. Principal component analysis (PCA) methods were used to isolate the latent structure of ESG attitudes and multiple linear regression analysis (OLS) to assess the impact of gender, institutional trust, social equality, environmental attitudes, and demographic factors. The empirical base was formed on the basis of a cross-national survey (N = 8,291) in the UK, USA, Russia and Kazakhstan. As a result of the PCA, four latent components were identified that explain about 60% of the total variance: traditional gender attitudes, institutional trust, social equality, and environmental orientation. Regression analysis showed a statistically significant influence of gender on attitudes towards traditional gender roles (B = -0.188; p < 0.001), which indicates a more pronounced egalitarian position of women. The greatest contribution to the variation of attitudes was made by institutional trust (β = 0.128; p < 0.001), followed by environmental orientation (β = 0.054; p < 0.001) and support for social equality (β = 0.025; p = 0.020). The gender gap was more pronounced in Kazakhstan and Russia than in the UK and the USA. The results obtained confirm that gender differences in ESG attitudes are stable, but contextually depend on the socio-institutional environment.

1. Chan, E. Y., Huang, Z., Hung, K. K., & Mark, C. K. (2019). Gender disparity in self-perceived climate change knowledge, attitude and behavior among the youth: A cross-sectional study. Environmental Health, 18(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-019-0484-5

2. CMI (Chr. Michelsen Institute). (2021). Gender and corruption: What do we really know? https://www.cmi.no/publications/7576-gender-and-corruption-what-do-we-really-know

3. CMI. (2021). Women in Leadership: Why Diversity Matters. Chartered Management Institute.

4. Dietz, T., Kalof, L., & Stern, P. C. (2002). Gender, values, and environmentalism. Social Science Quarterly, 83(1), 353– 364. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-6237.00088

5. Franzen, A., & Vogl, D. (2013). Two decades of measuring environmental attitudes: A comparative analysis of 33 countries. Global Environmental Change, 23(5), 1001–1008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.03.009

6. Hao, Y., Peng, H., Temulun, T., Liu, L., Mao, J., Lu, Z., & Chen, H. (2018). How harmful is air pollution to economic development? New evidence from PM2.5 concentrations of Chinese cities. Journal of Cleaner Production, 172, 743-757.

7. Hetherington, M. J., & Rudolph, T. J. (2015). Why Washington Won’t Work: Polarization, Political Trust, and the Governing Crisis. University of Chicago Press.

8. Inglehart, R., & Norris, P. (2003). Rising tide: Gender equality and cultural change around the world. Cambridge University Press.

9. Jiang, S., Peng, S., Yang, T., Cottrell, R.R., & Li, L. (2018). Overweight and Obesity Among Chinese College Students: An Exploration of Gender as Related to External Environmental Influences. American Journal of Men's Health, 12, 926 - 934.

10. OECD. (2018). Bridging the Trust Gap: The Role of Institutions in Promoting Trust. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264308879-en

11. OECD. (2018). Trust and Public Policy: How Better Governance Can Help Rebuild Public Trust. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264084940-en

12. Salnikova, E., Kassenova, A., & Omarova, G. (2022). Gendered attitudes towards corruption and governance: Evidence from Central Asia. Journal of Eurasian Studies, 13(4), 225–239. https://doi.org/10.1177/18793665221125673

13. Selm, K.R., Peterson, M., Hess, G., Beck, S.M., & McHale, M.R. (2019). Educational attainment predicts negative perceptions women have of their own climate change knowledge. PLoS ONE, 14. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0210149

14. Sammie, B., Mupfiga, E.T., Mwadzingeni, L., Chitata, T., & Mugandani, R. (2020). A gendered lens to self-evaluated and actual climate change knowledge. Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, 11, 65-75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-020-00641-6

15. Seidler, Z.E., Wilson, M.J., Rice, S.M., Kealy, D., Oliffe, J.L., & Ogrodniczuk, J.S. (2020). Virtual connection, real support? A study of loneliness, time on social media and psychological distress among men. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 68, 288-293. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020764020983836

16. Sundström, A., & Wängnerud, L. (2016). Corruption as an obstacle to women’s political representation: Evidence from local councils in 18 European countries: Evidence from local councils in 18 European countries. Party Politics, 22(3), 354-369. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068814549339

17. UNDP Kazakhstan. (2022). Gender equality and sustainable development in Kazakhstan: Country report. https://www.undp.org/kazakhstan

18. Xiao, C., & Hong, D. (2010). Gender differences in environmental behaviors in China. Population and Environment, 32(1), 88–104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11111-010-0115-z

19. Xiao, C., & McCright, A. M. (2015). Gender differences in environmental concern: Revisiting the institutional trust hypothesis in the USA. Environment and Behavior, 47(1), 17–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916513491571