SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS AND BOARD STRUCTURE: CONNECTING THE DOTS IN THE ENERGY SECTOR

Purpose: Framed on the Resource-Based View, the objective of this research was to investigate the effect of the structure of the board of directors on the engagement of firms with the sustainable development goals (SDG). Theoretical framework: Resource-Based View (RBV) and Sustainable development goals. Method: 100 firms in the energy sector based in the main emerging economies of the world were analyzed. To test the proposed hypotheses, an analysis of panel data and logistic regression model was performed. Result and Conclusion: The board structure in emerging countries plays a key role for firms to achieve greater engagement with the SDGs. The board size has a negative effect on SDGs, while the presence of social responsibility and audit committees has a positive effect on firms’ engagement with the SDGs. Research implications: It is necessary to consider committees as key configurations of the board structure, even if these are not mandatory in terms of regulation. Establishing, strengthening and encouraging the maintenance of committees focused on sustainability practices is to contribute to promising organizational results and to the reduction of negative externalities. Originality: In addition to confirming the Resource-Based View approach, our study examines the energy sector, which is one of the main agendas for discussions on climate change at a global level. We address the understanding of SDG in business, a field of research still in an embryonic stage. Although several studies have analyzed a variety of contexts together, we focused on emerging economies, bringing specific evidence to the sample countries


INTRODUCTION
Firms from different sectors have recurrently integrated the Sustainable Development Goals in recent years (SDG) in their sustainability strategies and corporate reports (Elalfy et al., 2020), seeking a competitive edge.Despite the recognition that, in general, industries of all sectors have a negative influence on the environment, it is understood that the energy sector deals directly with natural resources and thus has a significant role in climate change and patterns (Liang et al., 2023).Thus, this sector is one of the main agendas for discussions on climate change at a global level (Manes-Rossi & Nicolo, 2022), and will be analyzed in this study.
In order to analyze the contributions of firms to achieve the SDG, previous studies have identified that there is a scarce literature on the impacts of organizational factors on the adoption of sustainable practices and there are internal characteristics that contribute to the achievement of the SDG that are still unknown (Martínez-Ferrero & García-Meca, 2020), as the structure of the board of directors, as will be addressed in this study.3 The literature has pointed out the relationship and influence of the board of directors in the implementation and dissemination of corporate social responsibility and sustainability actions.Some authors have been concerned with evaluating the effect of board structure on environmental, social and governance (ESG) performance in Latin America (Husted & Sousa-Filho, 2019).Another study investigated the association between company board characteristics and corporate social responsibility in China (Liao et al., 2018).Mohammadi et al., (2021) understood the effect of board and audit committee characteristics on corporate social responsibility practices.
In this context, in the light of the Resource-Based View, this research argues that economic, environmental and social development, by organizations, occurs through the integration of SDGs to corporate actions, which are outlined by board directors, who are valuable, rare, organized and difficult to imitate resources (Barney, 2001; Ortiz-de-Mandojana & Aragon-Correa, 2015; Barney et al., 2021).The choice of this theory is because the board of directors is a strategic resource that leads organizations to better social and environmental performance (Pinheiro et al., 2023).From a resource-based view, the board is also an important element for organizations to improve their environmental performance and develop their economy sustainably (Ranasinghe, Badir, & Frank, 2022).
However, the relationship between board structure and the SDG in the energy sector is still unclear (Shahbaz et al., 2020), which is the sector that most emits carbon into the atmosphere, in addition to being one of the most important for the sustainability transition (Papadis & Tsatsaronis, 2020).From this perspective, there is still a need to observe aspects related to the structure of the board and its influence on the actions of firms related to the SDG, since it is observed that characteristics such as the size of the board, duality of CEOs and independent directors influence sustainable practices in organizations (Fernández-Gago et al., 2018;Liao et al., 2018;Mohammadi et al., 2021).Additionally, previous studies have jointly analyzed firms based in different development contexts, which makes it difficult to have specific evidence for emerging countries (Mohammadi et al., 2021).
Through the gaps that have not yet been closed by previous studies, the objective of this research is to investigate the effect of the structure of the board of directors on the engagement of firms with the objectives of sustainable development.To achieve this purpose, 100 firms in the energy sector based in the main emerging economies of the world were analyzed, based on the years between 2019 and 2021.Data were collected from the Refinitiv Eikon® database.
As theoretical contributions, this study adds to the knowledge already built about the contribution of firms in the energy sector to the Sustainable Development Goals, under the theoretical lens of the Resource-Based View.The survey results also contribute to deepen discussions based on the resource-based view, confirming that the board structure is an important resource for firms to achieve greater engagement with the SDGs.Our evidence suggests that the board of directors should not only monitor managers, as well as meeting the needs of the company's stakeholders, especially in relation to environmental and social issues.
The results also bring practical contributions, considering that by understanding how the structure of the boards can affect the adoption of the SDG, organizations can be more competitive in environmental, social and economic terms.As for social contributions, this study has government implications, considering that governments of emerging countries can encourage organizations to contribute to SDGs, especially those in the energy sector, through a green certification.

RESOURCE-BASED VIEW (RBV)
In the Resource-Based View (RBV) approach, organizational strengths are considered resources (e.g.processes, information, knowledge, etc.), that when valuable, rare, organized and difficult to imitate, they generate value and sustained advantage for organizations that use them strategically (Barney, 1991).The relationship between organizational resources and competitive advantage has been studied since the beginning of the RBV discussions (Barney et al., 2021).In this sense, the resource-based view literature has strengthened in the field of organizational strategies and has reached a point of maturity in the area, with several converging and critical discussions, in addition to combinations with different theoretical lenses and expansion in the understanding of strategic resources (Barney, 2018).However, the contemporary context still lacks studies that explain the resource-based view in the investigation of current phenomena (Pereira & Bamel, 2021), such as understanding the effect of the board of directors as a key resource for meeting sustainable development goals.
According to Freeman et al. (2021), stakeholder relationships are valuable and difficult (or almost impossible) to copy.From this perspective, the board of directors is a fundamental bridge for meeting the expectations of stakeholders, especially when related to social well-being and environmental quality.Therefore, the formation of a board is a valuable resource for organizations to improve their environmental performance (Ranasinghe, Baldir & Frank, 2022).Jiraporn et al. (2019) point out that policies and strategies that culminate in profit and in meeting social and legal demands are promoted by managers and guaranteed by corporate councils.Thus, it is understood that corporate councils are resources and organizational agents that can guide, institute and disseminate actions and strategies aimed at reducing negative social and environmental impacts (Ortiz-de-Mandojana & Aragon-Correa, 2015;Pinheiro et al., 2023).
According to Thompson and Alleyne (2022), boards are the bodies responsible for strategic decision-making and the achievement of various organizational goals.Therefore, the implementation of an effective agenda for sustainable development must be guided by boards of directors, based on their structures.As such, boards play an important role in ensuring that the sustainable competitiveness movement, be made viable and implemented, as a horizon for simultaneously meeting the multiple organizational objectives and the expectations of stakeholders.

Sustainable Development Goals (SDG)
The Sustainable Development Goals, systematized by the United Nations (UN) through the 2030 Agenda, reflect a set of far-reaching actions and strategies that, through national, transformative policies and international cooperation, seeks to combat harmful actions to the planet and direct resources to reduce negative socio-environmental impacts and building an equitable and sustainable world (Hannah et al., 2023).In this context, the UN has established 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) which aim to end poverty; develop strategies to improve social, economic and health inequalities; promotion of economic growth; improve education; and the environmental health of countries (Amorós Molina et al., 2023).
In this sense, these goals portray, in a broad and inclusive way, ending poverty (1); and hunger, generating food security, nutrition and sustainable agriculture (2); promote healthy living and well-being (3); ensure inclusive, equitable and quality education (4); promote gender equality (5); availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation (6); facilitate access to energy (7); generate economic and sustainable growth based on employment, productivity and income (8).
The SDGs seek to stimulate inclusive and sustainable innovation and industrialization (9); create opportunities to reduce inequalities within and between countries (10); make cities inclusive, safe and sustainable (11); enable sustainable consumption and production patterns (12); institute actions, strategies and policies to combat climate change (13); take measures for the conservation and sustainable use of seas and oceans (14); protect and restore terrestrial ecosystems, minimizing the effects of environmental degradation (15); promote pacifism and access to justice (16); and strengthen the global partnership for sustainable development (17).These objectives have a relationship of transversality and integration, since they complement each other in their projections and implementation (Zampier et al., 2022).
In this scenario, the involvement of firms in the 2030 Agenda and adoption of their SDG for sustainable development creates a space of opportunities for firms to strengthen their business models, integrating themselves more robustly in the social and environmental realities of their markets (Battaglia et al., 2020).In addition, at the organizational level, the analysis of sustainable development and the SDGs can be carried out from different conceptual frameworks, such as business ethics, stakeholder management, sustainability and corporate social responsibility (Suárez-Serrano et al., 2023).

Research hypotheses
According to Martínez-Ferrero and García-Meca (2020), the independence of the board of directors is crucial for monitoring and governing the issue of sustainable development.In this scenario, a study of the 500 largest US firms revealed that those with a higher proportion of independent members on the board were more likely to obtain sustainability reports with more quality and transparency (Herda et al., 2014).Similarly, other investigations have concluded that a greater share of independent directors generates higher results in environmental performance (Hussain et al., 2018).In the South African context, it was found that board independence has positive effects on integrated corporate governance reports and these, in turn, play an important role in achieving the SDGs by integrating sustainability into corporate strategy (Ahmed, 2023).Therefore, we developed the following hypothesis: H1: A more independent board has a positive effect on SDG engagement.CEO duality occurs when the positions of chairman and CEO are held by the same person (Uyar et al., 2021).Surveys with firms in Latin America (Tibiletti et al., 2021), Italy (Romano et al., 2020) and India (Oware & Awunyo-Vitor, 2021) have shown that when the same manager acts simultaneously as CEO and chairman of the board of directors, it reduces the monitoring by the board of directors and, consequently, the implementation of social and environmental practices (Tibiletti et al., 2021).Therefore, we developed the following hypothesis: H2: CEO duality has a negative effect on SDG engagement.On the other hand, the size and composition of the board of directors tend to have distinctive characteristics among firms.In this sense, Ahmed (2023) clarify that there are antagonistic versions about the influence of the size of the board of directors on the sustainable development of organizations.In this scenario, the size of this collegiate can impact its effectiveness, monitoring and guidance to firms (Alajmi & Worthington, 2023).The same authors argue that a larger board voluntarily provides more information than a smaller one, including aspects related to corporate social responsibility and sustainable development.Similarly, Ananzeh (2022) found a positive and significant relationship between a board with more members and voluntary disclosure of sustainability actions and corporate social responsibility in firms in Jordan.
On the other hand, some studies have also found that a greater number of board members can lead to lower sustainability performance (Naciti, 2019) and that, considering South Asian countries, a large board can lead to ineffective coordination processes, communication and decision-making, which means that the impact on SDG disclosure is negligible (Sekarlangit & Wardhani, 2021).Considering the identification of more positive mentions of the size of the board of directors, we developed the following hypothesis: H3: A larger board of directors has a positive effect on SDG engagement.
In addition to the independence and size of the board of directors as a guiding element for the SDG, performance in corporate social and environmental responsibility is also positively and significantly influenced by the presence of a sustainability committee (Jarboui et al., 2023).In this way, the existence of a sustainability committee, linked to the board of directors, demonstrates that the company assumes an environmental commitment and makes investments aimed at sustainable development (Aguilera et al., 2021;García et al., 2023).
In this sense, in the context of Australian firms, it was found that there is a positive relationship between the presence of a sustainability committee and the company's environmental performance, indicating the active role of this collegiate in monitoring issues for environmental performance, policies and actions for sustainable development.Furthermore, committees with more resources, authority and experience in sustainability lead to more significant environmental performance (Li et al., 2022).Therefore, we developed the following hypothesis: H4: The presence of a sustainability committee has a positive effect on SDG engagement.
It is worth mentioning that, like sustainability committees, audit committees are also important parts in the sustainable development process, since the quality and independence of this committee have positive effects on the integrated reports of corporate governance and on the achievement of social performance by integrating and monitoring sustainability in the company's strategy (Ahmed, 2023).
Similarly, scholars argue that independent audit committees are positively associated with the disclosure of environmental and governance information, playing a relevant role in stimulating sustainable development policies (Hasan et al., 2022).Nevertheless, studies such as the one by Farhan and Freihat (2021) and Pucheta-Martínez et al. ( 2021) verified that the audit committee had no significant effects on the disclosure of social and environmental responsibility information.
However, it has already been observed in other contexts, such as the Iranian, that the independence of the audit committee has a significant effect on corporate social responsibility policies (Mohammadi et al., 2021).It corroborates this understanding, the perception that these committees significantly influence the environmental performance of organizations and can encourage the achievement of SDG (Uyar et al., 2023).Therefore, we developed the following hypothesis: H5: The independent audit committee has a positive effect on SDG engagement.

METHODS
The sample is made up of 100 firms in the electricity sector, headquartered in the top ten emerging economies in the world, according to The New York Times (2022).Argentina, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, South Korea, Mexico, Poland, South Africa and Turkey form the group called "The Big Ten".Large emerging countries are important for the development of global trade, international financial stability and cooperation for sustainable development, since most of them have significant natural resources (Arrive & Feng, 2018).
In this study, we analyzed three years: 2019, 2020 and 2021.This period of time was chosen, since after the signing of the United Nations Global Compact, 195 countries have committed to encourage sustainable development and the reduction of greenhouse gases in their firms.In addition, we selected the most recent years of available financial, environmental and governance data in the Refinitiv Eikon® database.These years represent the pandemic years and as in Nundy et al. (2021), there are still few studies that analyze how firms engaged with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) during this period.
Table I presents the distribution of firms by country.As can be seen, the country with the largest number of firms in the sample is China, with 48 firms, which represents 58% of the sample.Then India and Indonesia have 17 and 8 firms respectively.On the other hand, the countries with the least representation are South Africa and Mexico with only two and one company, respectively.The dependent variable of the study corresponds to the engagement of firms with the SDGs of the United Nations.We collected this variable from the Refinitiv Eikon® database and the information was obtained according to the company's adequacy to the 17 SDGs.For example, if the company took actions to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions, then it receives 1 point in SDG 13, otherwise 0. In total, if the company has filed actions for the 17 SDG, it gets the maximum score, which is 17 points.The formula to measure this variable was: total points obtained by the company / 17 points (maximum score).Table II shows all the variables examined in the econometric models, as well as their descriptions.The independent research variables represent the structure of the board of directors.For the selection of these variables, this research took into account the study by Naciti (2019).The author of this study, through a literature review, defined which characteristics make up the board structure, which are: board independence, CEO duality, board size, presence of a corporate social responsibility committee, and presence of an independent audit committee.All these variables were collected from the Refinitiv Eikon® database.
Control variables were defined based on previous evidence from the literature.According to El Khoury et al. ( 2021), firms with higher financial performance, that is, return on assets, have more financial resources to invest in environmental issues.Sheikh (2019) points out that financial leverage allows firms to have greater social and environmental engagement.In addition, larger firms have a greater number of stakeholders, which increases their interest in not only serving the interests of shareholders, but also those of the State, NGOs, employees and the community (Romano et al., 2020).
In addition to the financial variables listed above, disclosure of sustainability reports and the country's gross domestic product (GDP) were added as control variables.Furlotti et al. (2019) identified that firms that disclose an annual sustainability report carry out more social and environmental actions and therefore want to disclose them through their non-financial reports.Additionally, the study by Pucheta-Martínez and Gallego-Álvarez (2019) suggests that institutional economic differences between countries can affect corporate social responsibility.For this reason, the variable that measures the GDP of countries was added to the models.
To test the developed hypotheses and, consequently, achieve the proposed research objective, this study used panel data analysis with fixed effects.This statistical technique is suitable, since when using data regression analysis, the risk of multicollinearity and estimation bias are eliminated.In addition, the panel data with fixed effects reveals the effect of the independent variables on the dependent variable, considering the effect of time (Hair Jr et al., 2019).The equation below represents the econometric models developed: In addition to panel data analysis, this research used the GMM dynamic panel (Generalized Method of Moments).According to Ben Lahouel et al. (2019), the Generalized Moments Method is efficient because it considers unobservable heterogeneity and manages to eliminate the effect of data endogeneity, reducing estimation biases.In addition to the main estimates, additional tests were performed, such as the F test, the value inflation factor (VIF), the Breusch-Pagan test and the Wald test.As can be seen, this research employed several statistical analysis approaches, such as univariate methodologies, through descriptive analysis and correlation matrix, and multivariate, through panel data analysis, GMM and Logit regression, as robustness analysis.With this, the search allowed us to find more reliable findings.All statistical analyzes of this research were performed in the STATA 13® software.

RESULTS: DESCRIPTIVE AND BIVARIATE ANALYSIS
Table III presents the descriptive statistics of the variables used in the study.Regarding the sustainable development objectives, we found that the firms in the sample ranged from no disclosure of these to disclosure of all SDG.The average of firms that reported all sustainable development goals was 42%.As for the structure of the board, 43.33% is the average of companies that have their boards formed independently.In 34% of the companies, on average, the CEOs are chairman of the board, at the same time, indicating that in most of the sample there is occupation of different people, between both positions.Board size averages 9.14 directors and the company with the largest board has 20 directors.
In addition, we verified a high percentage on average of companies that have corporate social responsibility committees, this condition being found in 69% of the cases analyzed.In the same trend, on average, 82.61% of companies have independent audit committees.The averages for ROA, financial leverage and company size were respectively: 11%, 57% and 9,83%.Finally, we identified that in only 21%, on average, of the cases analyzed there is disclosure of the annual corporate social responsibility report, and that the average GDP of the countries of the companies investigated was 12. Table IV indicates the correlations found between the studied variables.Due to the moderate values of the correlation coefficients between the independent variables, it is evident that the analyses do not suffer from problems with multicollinearity.Significant results were found between the dependent variable (SDG) and the independent variables related to the independence of the board and the corporate social responsibility and audit committees, as well as related to the control variables company size, disclosure of the annual corporate social responsibility report and GDP.

Multivariate analysis
Table V presents the findings of the first five models built to test the research hypotheses.As can be seen, board independence and duality did not show significance.However, the results reveal that board size has a negative effect on companies' engagement with SDGs.In practice, smaller boards may be more effective in directing resources and actions towards achieving the SDGs.In addition, the presence of a corporate social responsibility committee and an audit committee on the board has a positive effect on firms' engagement with the SDGs.Regarding the control variables, the findings show that the size of the company has a positive effect on the engagement of companies with the SDG.Larger companies have more resources and a greater number of stakeholders interested not only in their financial return, but also in its environmental and social performance.Additionally, the disclosure of a corporate social responsibility report encourages companies to adopt actions in favor of the SDG.The variable that measures the GDP of the countries showed a negative sign, indicating that in countries with greater economic development, companies have less engagement with the SDG.In Table VI, new econometric models were operationalized in order to confirm the findings in Table V.Thus, the hypotheses were tested by the dynamic panel of the Generalized Moments Method.Overall, the results remained stable, indicating that the results are reliable.The variables that measure board independence and CEO duality remain insignificant for companies' engagement with SDGs.Board size has a negative effect on SDGs.The findings also suggest that the committees, both for social responsibility and for auditing have an important role for companies to take more actions to achieve the SDGs.In model 6, return on assets had a positive effect on SDG.This indicates that companies headquartered in emerging countries, which have greater financial performance, have greater engagement with the SDGs.In this sense, companies that have more financial resources available can carry out more social and environmental actions that meet the SDGs.The results also show that larger firms and firms that annually publish a social responsibility report have greater social and environmental engagement.Countries' GDP continues to have a negative effect on SDGs.

Robustness analysis
To give more validity to the research findings, econometric models were performed by logistic regression, as shown in Table VII.Thus, the dependent variable, that is, the engagement of companies with the SDG, received a new measurement.Companies that engaged with more than 8 SDGs received 1; and 0, otherwise.Therefore, the nature of the dependent variable is binary, with 1 or 0 being the possible values.The findings of the econometric models by logistic regression indicate that the independence of the board and the CEO duality are not determinant for the engagement of firms with the SDGs.The results of the other independent variables remained stable.Board size negatively affects SDG engagement.In turn, the social responsibility and audit committees positively affect SDG.Therefore, firms in the energy sector that want to achieve a higher level of engagement with the SDGs should implement committees on their boards of directors.
Additionally, the findings allow us to identify which larger firms are more committed to the SDG.Larger firms generally have more financial and intellectual resources, which favors their engagement with SDG issues.For greater engagement with SDGs, investments in environmental technologies are needed, as well as environmental policies and strategies to mitigate the effects of corporate actions on the environment.As shown in Table VII, the annual disclosure of a corporate social responsibility report positively affects the engagement of energy firms with the SDGs.In practice, firms that invest their resources in the preparation and publication possibly value greater environmental transparency with their stakeholders.The results also show that, for the analyzed sample, in countries with lower GDP, firms tend to have greater engagement with SDGs.

DISCUSSION AND THEORETICAL AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS
Our results confirmed hypothesis four (The presence of a sustainability committee has a positive effect on SDG engagement) and hypothesis five (The independent audit committee has a positive effect on SDG engagement).Regarding hypothesis 3, the findings showed a negative effect of board size on SDG engagement.
Regarding hypothesis 3, the results of the present research differ from those previous studies that found a positive relationship between the size of the board and the disclosure of corporate social responsibility reports, like the one by Fernández-Gago et al. (2018), who found such a relationship in Spanish firms, from 2009 to 2014.Likewise, a positive relationship was also evidenced by Husted and Sousa-Filho (2019), when investigating firms in Latin America, from 2011 to 2014.One of the justifications for finding a divergent result is that for firms in the energy sector, a large number of members on the board can lead to greater inefficiency in decisions and, therefore, environmental agendas are less addressed in meetings.
Regarding hypothesis 4, the results demonstrate that the existence of a sustainability committee positively impacts the engagement of firms with the SDG.Similar results were found by Al-Shaer et al. (2022), who found that the corporate social responsibility committee impacts the development of policies and disclosure of CSR practices.Zampone et al. (2022) identified the corporate social responsibility committee as a potential governance mechanism for achieving superior environmental performance.It is understood, therefore, that CSR committees are relevant tools for the formulation and dissemination of practices, policies to achieve the SDGs and, consequently, the interests of the different stakeholders (Suárez-Serrano et al., 2023).
Regarding hypothesis 5, the results confirm it, that is, the presence of an independent audit committee has a positive effect on the engagement of firms with the SDG.Uyar et al. (2023) when investigating a global sample of the Thomson Reuters Eikon database, from 2002 to 2019, identified that both the experience and the independence of the audit committee influenced the structuring and existence of CSR reports.In the same way, Song (2022) when performing multivariate regression in a sample of Korean firms, identified the efficiency of audit committees for the quality of CSR reports, when they are active, independent, with accounting experience and relative power.Thus, it is evident that the independence of the CSR committee increases the level of commitment of organizations with the SDG, as this condition increases the credibility of sustainability information and improves the scope of organizational results (Ahmed, 2023), whether economic or environmental.
Overall, the findings reveal that the board structure has a decisive power for firms to have a superior performance in terms of SDG.Our evidence also points out that in emerging countries, larger boards may be inefficient in dealing with environmental and social issues.As such, smaller boards can be more organized and efficient.Because of this, these councils may have more time to raise additional agendas, such as the SDG.Therefore, firms in the energy sector should be aware that the board structure plays an important role in building and strengthening stakeholder trust, ensuring that environmental responsibilities are met.
The findings have important theoretical implications.First, the research finds that larger boards negatively impacted energy firms' engagement with the SDGs.This fact leads to unique reflections on the composition of the board of firms in developing countries and on how private interests or power games can infer the sustainability decisions of these firms.This is an interesting result, since the institutional context can influence strategic decisions aimed at corporate sustainability.A second reflection is that the existence of corporate social responsibility and independent audit committees and their positive impact on meeting the SDGs.Considering the resource-based Vision, committees can be considered as key resources for meeting the SDG and consequently for increasing market competitiveness.In this sense, we verified the theoretical relevance of indicating the committees as strategic mechanisms for obtaining social, environmental and economic results.In general, these findings make it possible to bring new empirical evidence that confirms the resource-based view.
In managerial terms, the results contribute to draw attention to the importance of the following relationship: the presence of committees on boards and sustainability.This potentiality involves both political aspects (social-environmental responsibility for meeting social goals, for example), and strategic-organizational (reaching economic and sustainability results, for example).Thus, establishing, strengthening and encouraging the maintenance of committees focused on social responsibility practices is to contribute to promising organizational results and to the reduction of negative externalities, by meeting stakeholder expectations.Thus, this study points to the need to consider committees as key configurations, even if they are not mandatory in terms of regulation.
Finally, the study brings contributions to the governmental scope.Considering that the existence of committees can reflect on the transparency and achievement of the SDG, the governments of emerging countries can encourage their organizations to act in line with the sustainability practices of the United Nations Organization (ONU).Such incentives may involve, for example, public-private partnerships to solve real social problems, making public and private institutions partners in achieving the goals of the 2030 Agenda.In addition, governments can act in the constitution of green certifications that add competitive advantages for firms that carry out more actions that meet the SDG.

CONCLUSION
This research aimed to investigate the effect of the structure of the board of directors on the engagement of firms with the objectives of sustainable development.To achieve this purpose, the research examined 100 firms in the energy sector based in the main emerging economies of the world.
The results bring new evidence that the board structure in emerging countries plays a key role for firms to achieve greater engagement with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG).Findings show that board size has a negative effect on SDG, whereas the presence of committees such as the social responsibility and audit committees have a positive effect on firms' engagement with the SDGs.In addition, the study confirms previous studies by proving that firms with better financial performance and that publish a social responsibility report tend to have greater social and environmental engagement.The findings allow us to conclude that the structure of the boards is a valuable resource, rare and difficult to imitate and that it can lead the company to have a greater disclosure of the SDG.
Although this study presents results through different statistical methods (panel data with fixed effects, generalized moments method and logistic regression) for a period still little studied (2019-2021), this research is not free of limitations.First, we analyzed the structure of the board using the framework by Naciti (2019), limiting the use of other variables.Second, the study analyzed a pandemic period, which may affect the results, as many organizations were concerned about their economic survival, which reduced its investments in environmental issues.Therefore, to overcome these limitations, new studies must be developed, which may consider other variables to compose the structure of the board, such as the presence of women, the religion and ethnicity of directors and the presence of directors of different nationalities.Another suggestion is to expand the sample of analyzed firms, comparing developed and emerging countries.Finally, it is recommended to introduce another variable at the institutional level, such as the quality of the institutional environment in the countries.

Table 1 .
Segmentation of sample firms by analyzed country

Table 2 .
Description of study variables Variable Description SDGOALS Engagement with the Sustainable Development Goals: This variable is the sum of the 17 SDGs, ranging from 0 (if the company has not disclosed any SDGs) to 17 (if the company has disclosed all SDGs).
ROAReturn on Assets: This variable refers to a financial index that indicates how profitable a company is in relation to its total assets.LEVERAGFinancial leverage: This variable is calculated using the following formula: Total liabilities/total assets.FIRMSIZE Company size: This variable is represented by the natural log of total assets.Sustainable Development Goals and Board Structure: Connecting the Dots in The Energy Sector ___________________________________________________________________________ Rev. Gest.Soc.Ambient.| Miami | v.18.n.1 | p.1-19 | e04855 | 2024.8 CSREPORTS Corporate social responsibility annual report: 1 = if the company discloses a CSR report annually to its stakeholders; 0 = otherwise.GDP Gross Domestic Product: Log of GDP, which represents national wealth and Country's economic development Source: Authors (2024)

Table 3 .
Descriptive analysis of variables

Table 5 .
Panel data regression results

Table 6 .
Dynamic panel results by GMM