Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Systematic and bibliometric review shows climate risk exposure penalizes corporate valuation while disclosure benefits depend on credibility, highlighting the need for substantive action.
Climate risk has become a defining challenge for businesses, influencing strategic decision-making, organisational resilience, and long-term performance. Despite the rapid growth of research in this area, the intellectual development and thematic evolution of climate-related corporate studies remain fragmented. This study provides a comprehensive synthesis of the literature through a bibliometric analysis and systematic review of 643 Scopus-indexed, peer-reviewed articles published between 1993 and 2025, with a systematic thematic synthesis of 23 empirical studies. Using Biblioshiny and VOSviewer, science-mapping techniques, including co-citation analysis and bibliographic coupling, were employed to examine publication trends, intellectual foundations, and major research themes. The findings indicate a shift from environmental measurement and compliance toward climate-risk management, carbon disclosure, and sustainable finance. Financial outcomes are heterogeneous, and context-dependent carbon exposure is generally associated with valuation penalties and downside risk, while the relevance of disclosure and climate strategies depends on credibility, substantive implementation, and organisational and institutional conditions. The integrated review shows that the financial implications of climate-related corporate actions are contingent upon climate-risk exposure, disclosure credibility, organisational capabilities, and institutional context. It further explains the coexistence of mixed empirical findings and identifies priorities for future research and policy. The findings offer valuable implications for researchers, corporate managers, investors, and policymakers seeking to strengthen sustainable business practices under an evolving climate risk landscape.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Akanksha et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: