Governance and Social Responsibility: Palestinian Investment Fund

Business and Economic Research ISSN 2162-4860 2023, Vol. 13, No. 4 Governance and Social Responsibility: Palestinian Investment Fund Dr. Bahaa Subhi Awwad (Corresponding author) Associate Professor of Finance, Department of Computerized Banking and Financial Sciences Faculty of Business and Economics, Palestine Technical University - Kadoorie, Palestine ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6356-9956. E-mail: Dr.awwadb@hotmail.com Dr. Majdi Wael Alkababji Associate Professor of Accounting, Department of Accounting Faculty of Administrative and Economic Sciences, Al-Quds Open University, Palestine ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5619-3866. E-mail: magdy79go@yahoo.com Mrs. Shatha Zidan Department of Public Administration Faculty of Business and Economics, Palestine Technical University - Kadoorie, Palestine E-mail: shatha.zedan1995@gmail.com Received: September 29, 2023 Accepted: December 10, 2023 Published: December 14, 2023 doi:10.5296/ber.v13i4.21353 URL: https://doi.org/10.5296/ber.v13i4.21353 Abstract The study aimed to assess the influence of corporate governance on social responsibility, applied on the Palestinian Investment Fund. The study utilized a quantitative analytical approach and gathered essential data from the Investment Fund's annual financial reports spanning the period from 2006 to 2020, available on its official website. The content analysis method, employing a checklist for measuring the social responsibility disclosure index, was applied to the annual financial reports. Data processing was carried out using SATAA. The study's findings revealed that corporate governance, particularly in its dimensions of board size, double CEO, independence, and gender diversity, significantly impacted social responsibility across dimensions combined, including society, environment, employees, 185 http://ber.macrothink.org Business and Economic Research ISSN 2162-4860 2023, Vol. 13, No. 4 customers, and the quality of service. However, the educational background dimension did not exhibit a notable effect on social responsibility. As a result of the research, it was recommended that organizations conduct annual assessments of corporate governance performance, making comparisons with previous years. Moreover, institutions were advised to provide comprehensive financial statements along with complementary explanations. This practice is deemed crucial for decision-makers and stakeholders, enabling them to obtain a clear understanding of the organization's status and system concerning various aspects of social responsibility and corporate governance. Keywords: Corporate governance, Social responsibility, Palestine investment fund. 1. Introduction The modern thought of institutions requires that it build its strategies grounded in the principles of corporate governance even not limit itself to building its reputation on financial reports only, but rather it must take into account the principles of social responsibility that help institutions create a work environment that can keep pace with developments in all administrative, economic and technological aspects ( Al-Zahra, 2020), many institutions that aim to improve their image and achieve their financial goals have adopted special programs for social responsibility to achieve this (Al-Lawi et al. 2020), where social responsibility programs aim to maximize social contributions that return an appropriate return to society, moreover, institutions bear responsibility for the repercussions of their actions and decisions on society and the environment (Vuong et al., 2021) through ethical practices and transparency that are integrated with sustainable development, and social responsibility can be considered as a strategic approach to overcome the negative effects on the external environment, so it is considered a form of value creation for society (Erawati et al., 2021). In Palestine, publicly owned enterprises have received a great deal of attention. The government has established wholly owned enterprises to increase economic development processes, and to ensure the strengthening of state ownership of some vital sectors. One of the most prominent of these institutions is the Palestine Investment Fund, which represents a public company that is managed according to a model of the private sector, and stands out as a prominent institution. Founded in 2003, it operates as a public shareholding company registered with the Ministry of National Economy. It manages public money and manages investments inside and outside Palestine. The Palestine Investment Fund, with its own slogan (we invest and influence), has achieved many achievements, as the fund carries out its business through its subsidiaries, each of which is diversified in the investment and business it engages in. Against this backdrop, this study came to reveal the nature of the impact that links corporate governance with social responsibility in one of the state-owned entities in Palestine, which is the Palestine Investment Fund. 1.1 Study Problem The existence of institutions is inherently tied to the imperative of survival, compelling them to seek methods and strategies that enable profit generation for the fulfillment of their goals 186 http://ber.macrothink.org Business and Economic Research ISSN 2162-4860 2023, Vol. 13, No. 4 and societal activities, thereby ensuring their survival. So corporate governance came as a comprehensive and integrated system that aims to make the institution continue in light of the circumstances surrounding it specifically within the context of the Palestinian Investment Fund, which is referred to as its role in developing the economy through preserving public money and managing it efficiently, as that fund is a public sector-owned institution that must be responsible for bridging many social gaps, achieving development, and improving the living conditions of members of society. His ownership of the state and the nature of his investment work necessitate that he pay more attention to social responsibility compared to other companies and institutions, so a solid foundation must be provided that enhances the performance of his duties through the application of corporate governance with its principles. In light of the above, the main question framing the study problem is: "What is the impact of corporate governance on the social responsibility of the Palestinian Investment Fund?" The main study question can be effectively addressed by investigating the following sub-questions: 1. What is the extent of applying corporate governance in its various dimensions (board size, double CEO, independence, gender diversity, diversity of educational background) at the Palestine Investment Fund? 2. What is the level of practicing social responsibility in its combined dimensions (social responsibility towards society, social responsibility towards the environment, social responsibility towards employees, social responsibility towards clients and quality of service) at the Palestine Investment Fund? 3. What is the impact of corporate governance in its various dimensions (board size, double CEO, independence, gender diversity, diversity of educational background) on social responsibility in all its dimensions (social responsibility towards society, social responsibility towards the environment, social responsibility towards employees, social responsibility towards customers and quality service) at the Palestinian Investment Fund? 1.2 Importance of Studying The study derives its scientific and practical importance from the effectiveness and flexibility of the topics it deals with, as it puts before its eyes an administrative concept of a holistic nature called institutional governance, which has become a central axis in the march of institutions, and then its role in improving its conditions emerged as a tool and approach that seeks to address ethical and administrative problems and aims to provide services With the highest possible efficiency and achieving excellence in performance in order to achieve development in all its forms, it is also concerned with one of the issues that have become a cornerstone in societies, which is social responsibility whose role lies in improving the conditions of community members, which has become a criterion for judging the extent of community growth and development. These variables have been studied in one of the state-owned institutions in Palestine, which is the Palestinian Investment Fund, which carries out investment projects to achieve economic development in Palestine. 187 http://ber.macrothink.org Business and Economic Research ISSN 2162-4860 2023, Vol. 13, No. 4 1.3 Study Terms Following the examination of a series of prior studies addressing the variables and literature pertinent to the current research, the terms of the present study were defined as follows:  Corporate Governance: It is a framework that outlines the company's goals, establishes the methods for achieving these objectives, and oversees its performance. Additionally, it involves specifying and elucidating the connections among the company's management, board of directors, shareholders, and stakeholders to guarantee smooth workflow. Corporate governance aims at the optimal use of resources and improving economic efficiency to reach growth in addition to Enhancing investor confidence in the company (OECD, 2015, P11; Palestinian Corporate Governance Code, 2009). The principles of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) regarding corporate governance were formulated as follows: OECD, 2015). Board size: It refers to the number of individuals comprising the board of directors within the organizational structure (Tulung & Ramdani, 2018). It is imperative to set a minimum of two members and a maximum limit to ensure the board's effectiveness in fulfilling its functions. Independence: ―The Institute of Internal Auditors in the United States defined an independent board member as a person who has no professional or personal ties to the institution or its management other than the services he performs as a member‖ (Al-Kababji, 2019). The duplication of the CEO: ―or it is called the duplication of the position: involves shared responsibilities carried out by both the Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer. In this scenario, the Chairman of the Board assumes the role of Chief Executive Officer and undertakes the duties assigned to both positions (Borlea et 2017). the the the al., Gender diversity: "When a woman is appointed as a member of the board of directors due to her qualifications and attributes that make her a valuable asset to the institution, it contributes to diversifying the traditionally male-dominated board. The inclusion of female members enhances the overall diversity of the board and brings varied perspectives to the decision-making process" (Al-Khadash and Al-Washly, 2019). Diversity of educational background: ―refers to the variety of academic degrees held by board members" (Nielsen & Huse, 2010).  Social Responsibility: The World Business Council for Sustainable Development characterizes it as the persistent dedication of companies to uphold ethical conduct and contribute to economic development, simultaneously enhancing the well-being of the workforce, their families, and the broader community. This commitment aims to improve the local community and society as a whole (WBCSD, 2019). In alignment with Schwartz & Carroll's (2003) framework, social responsibility encompasses 188 http://ber.macrothink.org Business and Economic Research ISSN 2162-4860 2023, Vol. 13, No. 4 economic, legal, ethical, and philanthropic expectations that organizations are expected to meet at a given time. The catalysts for social responsibility are articulated by Shayan et al. (2022): Social responsibility towards society: ―Enhancing a robust sense of community, cultivating a profound feeling of inclusion among individuals, and fostering social stability through the commitment to social justice and the application of the principle of equal opportunity are fundamental aspects of the social responsibility of business organizations" (Madani and Weghni, 2020). Social responsibility towards the environment: ―The institution bears a large part of the responsibility in this field, and it includes controlling pollution as a result of production processes, preventing its occurrence or spread, preserving natural resources and minimizing waste or damage‖ (Alkababji, 2014). Social responsibility towards employees: "The organization's commitment to providing the necessary services aimed to geared towards elevating the quality of life for its employees, ensuring job satisfaction and to provide a suitable environment that encourages more effort and giving." Orazalin, (2019). Social responsibility towards customers and quality of service: ―Working to raise the level of services and goods, and the scope of this group includes activities related to relations with customers in terms of their satisfaction with the product or service, and these activities include the qualitative aspects of products such as their suitability for use and providing the desired benefits as well as their impact on pollution environment, in addition to achieving consumer satisfaction, and there are activities related to honesty in advertising the product or service, clarity of the method of use, and low risks associated with them‖ (Salim and Al-Shuwaidi, 2020). 2. Previous Studies and Hypotheses Development The literature is rich in a huge amount of studies that were concerned with examining the relationship between corporate governance and social responsibility, as many studies relied on a systematic system, foundations, and theories to show the extent of the impact of corporate governance on the social responsibility of institutions and aiming to clarify the dynamics between these two concepts. Nevertheless, a consensus regarding the nature of their relationship and how it manifests across diverse institutional contexts remains elusive (Zaman et al., 2022). (Zaman et al., 2022). In a study conducted by Abu Salim (2018) focused on measuring the influence of corporate governance mechanisms on fostering social responsibility in industrial companies and auditing firms, data was collected by distributing a questionnaire, leading to the conclusion that both internal and external corporate governance mechanisms play a significant role in promoting social responsibility. Tang et al. (2020) conducted a comprehensive study using a sample of 214 state-owned mining companies (SOEs) listed in China over the period from 2008 to 2016, by studying the configurations of the dimensions of institutional governance (duality of the CEO, independence of board members, diversity of board members, ownership structure, ownership Institutional, level of 189 http://ber.macrothink.org Business and Economic Research ISSN 2162-4860 2023, Vol. 13, No. 4 marketing, media coverage) on the performance of social responsibility (society, environment, governance of social responsibility, products in terms of strengths and interests, diversification, employee relations), the study aimed to understand how these dimensions of corporate governance collectively influence the performance of social responsibility across different domains. The findings of the study suggested that the performance of social responsibility is likely to be influenced by common dimensions of corporate governance, indicating an interdependence among these factors rather than operating independently. Notably, the study highlighted the significance of a concentrated ownership structure, robust government intervention, and media pressure in enhancing the effectiveness of corporate governance patterns, ultimately leading to a higher level of social responsibility within the examined state-owned mining companies. Other studies have similarly uncovered that not all dimensions of corporate governance uniformly and contribute positively to the various aspects of social responsibility. The study of Tandoh et al. (2022) specifically focused on small and medium-sized companies in Ghana. In this research, the aim was to investigate the influence of social responsibility on the sustainability of these companies, with an additional exploration of the mediating role played by senior management in this relationship. The data for this study were collected through the distribution of questionnaires to 397 employees of small and medium-sized companies in Ghana, the findings of the study provided insights into the diverse effects of various dimensions of corporate governance on the economic, environmental, and social aspects of corporate social responsibility within this specific context. The findings from the study revealed distinct effects of various corporate governance dimensions on the economic, environmental, and social dimensions of corporate social responsibility within small and medium-sized companies in Ghana, where there was a positive effect of the board of directors on the economic dimension of social responsibility, however, it did not affect the social and environmental dimensions, As for the size of the board of directors, it had a positive impact on the social and environmental dimensions, while it did not have a significant impact or relationship with the economic dimension. The same applies to institutional ownership, which significantly affected the social and environmental dimensions, indicating a consistent pattern in the impact of institutional ownership on various dimensions of corporate social responsibility within small and medium-sized companies in Ghana. And in the study by Balqt (2020), aimed to examine and analyze the extent to which Algerian insurance companies adopted institutional governance in its dimensions (structure, governance, stakeholders, tasks and responsibilities of the board of directors, specialized committees, auditing and financial control, disclosure and transparency) and social responsibility in its dimensions (social responsibility towards society, towards customers, towards employees, towards the environment), in addition to knowing the impact of institutional governance under study on achieving the dimensions of social responsibility, the study focused on employees working within the departments of insurance companies in the state of Annaba. The total participant count for this research comprised 104 individuals, the study outcomes revealed that the examined companies exhibited a high level of corporate governance adoption, coupled with a moderate degree of commitment to social responsibility. Moreover, the findings indicated a robust correlation between the implementation of corporate governance practices and the 190 http://ber.macrothink.org Business and Economic Research ISSN 2162-4860 2023, Vol. 13, No. 4 attainment of social responsibility dimensions. This correlation was particularly evident in the context of a singular guiding principle—disclosure and transparency. A study conducted by Abu Alia and Barham (2022) conducted a comprehensive study exploring the interplay of earnings management, corporate governance, concerning the correlation between social responsibility disclosure and its influence on the value of a company. Focusing on 41 companies listed on the Palestine Stock Exchange, the research encompassed various social responsibility dimensions (such as those related to employees, customers, products, and human resources). The findings indicated a notable influence of corporate governance on social responsibility practices. However, intriguingly, the study did not identify a significant impact of governance on the relationship between social responsibility disclosure and the company's overall value. In contrast, research indicates that corporate governance negative a detrimental influence on the disclosure of social responsibility, An illustration of this is evident in the study by Worokinasih and Zaini (2020), which aimed to assess the effects of effective corporate governance on the disclosure of corporate social responsibility across various dimensions (including economic indicators, environment, employment, human rights, society, and product responsibility) and its subsequent impact on the company's value. The study encompassed all mining companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange between 2014 and 2017, totaling 40 companies. The findings revealed that effective corporate governance positively and significantly affected the company's value. However, it also unveiled a negative and significant correlation between good governance and the disclosure of social responsibility. Interestingly, despite the negative impact on disclosure, the study observed that the disclosure of corporate social responsibility did not exert a significant influence on the overall value of the company. Resource dependence theory proposes that a board of directors, exhibiting diversity in gender, nationality, age, and cultural background, is inclined to generate a broader range of ideas and express diverse perspectives. This tendency holds true irrespective of whether the board members originate from various cultural backgrounds and environments. The success of the institution is linked to this diversity (Hammadi & Jassim, 2022). Additionally, board size, a common attribute in corporate governance, is frequently examined in studies related to social responsibility. Existing literature on board size can be grouped into two categories, one that favors large boards and the other that favors smaller boards (Guerrero-Villegas et al., 2018). Advocates of large boards believe that increasing board size improves board efficiency in providing support, addition to However, they reduce agency costs resulting from biased management actions (Riyadh et al., 2019), supporters of smaller boards contend that such boards are more efficient in monitoring and controlling corporate governance mechanisms compared to their larger counterpartoards (Amran, 2013). The findings of Alabdullah et al. (2019) reveal a positive and statistically significant correlation between the size of the board of directors and the extent of corporate social responsibility disclosure, as the larger the size of the company's board of directors, the greater the company's disclosure of corporate social responsibility. Similar results were obtained in the study of Dias et al. (2017), which showed that the size of the board of directors has a positive impact on social responsibility, as the larger boards of directors possess a more comprehensive range of experiences, better control, greater transparency, and a high level of social responsibility. 191 http://ber.macrothink.org Business and Economic Research ISSN 2162-4860 2023, Vol. 13, No. 4 The study by Nwude & Nwude (2021) conducted in Nigeria on 11 commercial banks, for the period between 2007-2018, provided a model and evidence that the internal corporate governance mechanism, which is the size of the board of directors, works to promote the interests of shareholders and other stakeholders positively to support more Investing in corporate social responsibility, it has been concluded that banks with a large board size that consists of people with different experiences and have the ability to use resources efficiently will improve the allocation of resources and are directed towards corporate social responsibility, so the size of the large board of directors should be encouraging in the industry banking. In a study conducted by Lin & Nguyen (2022) to analyze the association between board attributes, including board size and corporate social responsibility performance, for 68 companies whose information was obtained from CSR Hub and corporate reports, it was found that board size positively affects responsibility performance. Social. In contrast, Dakhli's (2021) study of French-listed companies indicated that board size is negatively associated with social responsibility. On the other hand, Orazalin (2019), which aimed to find out the impact of the characteristics of the board of directors, including the size of the board of directors and disclosures of social responsibility in the banking sector in Kazakhstan, revealed that the size of the board of directors does not affect the company's disclosures of social responsibility. Some previous studies have identified the relationship between dual CEO positions and disclosure of social responsibility as negatively correlated, and in a study by Guerrero-Villegas et al. (2018) The aim was to find out the relationships between the characteristics of the board of directors (independence of the board of directors, the duality of the CEO, the size of the board, and women in boards of directors) and the disclosure of corporate social responsibility (CSRD) as a means to improve the reputation of the company, by following the analysis (Meta-analysis) to summarize the evidence of 88 studies, where the results revealed that the duality of the CEO had a significantly negative relationship with the disclosure of corporate social responsibility, while the independence of the board of directors, the size of the board and the representation of women had a significantly positive relationship with the disclosure of corporate social responsibility. Alabdullah et al. (2019) by searching for the nature of the relationship between the size of the board of directors and the double CEO and corporate social responsibility (CSR), and it was conducted on the Malaysian companies listed on the Malaysian Stock Exchange, where 91 companies were selected, the findings of the research indicated that there is a negative relationship for the double position in the disclosure and disclosure of responsibility Social. The Jing & Moon (2021) study examined the impact of CEO attributes (dual position, CEO age, term of office, education, share ownership, and stock option) on social responsibility decisions. Employment, environment, consumers, and products were selected as areas of social responsibility. And on the airlines that are based in the United States, the number of companies reached 15 companies for the period between 1999-2016, and the results indicated that the social responsibility of the product was negatively associated with the duplication of positions, as the duplication of the CEO leads to less devotion of resources towards corporate social responsibility for the product. Conversely, in a research investigation carried out by Bukair & Rahman (2015) on the 53 Islamic banks operating in the Gulf Cooperation Council countries 192 http://ber.macrothink.org Business and Economic Research ISSN 2162-4860 2023, Vol. 13, No. 4 in 2008, to know the impact of the board of directors' attributes (composition of the board of directors, the duplication of the CEO, the size of the board) on the disclosure of corporate social responsibility. The results indicated that there is no statistically significant relationship between the characteristics of the board of directors (composition of the board of directors, the duplication of the CEO, the size of the board) and the disclosure of corporate social responsibility. The findings suggested that there is no statistically significant correlation between the attributes of the board of directors (including board composition, CEO duplication, and board size) and the extent of corporate social responsibility disclosure. This conclusion was reinforced by Malik et al. (2020) in their study on whether the personal and professional characteristics of the CEO (Duality of the CEO, gender, ownership of the CEO, tenure of the CEO, education of the CEO, age of the CEO, and compensation of the CEO) affect social responsibility or not, and that Applied to 179 companies from 6 sectors listed on the Pakistan Stock Exchange for the period between 2009-2018, The findings unveiled that duplication, gender and CEO ownership lack statistical significance, while other variables have a positive effect. As indicated by the study of Jaidi et al. (2022), it was noted that the independence of the board of directors holds the potential to improve the performance of institutions. Consequently, socially responsible institutions are inclined to have a higher proportion of independent directors on their boards, as Rashid & Hossain (2021) conducted a study aimed at finding out the mediating impact of independent directors on the connection between politicians serving on the board of directors and the disclosure of corporate social responsibility, data was collected From 30 banks listed on the Bangladesh Stock Exchange for the period between 2013-2018, where the study found that the independence of members enhances social responsibility and there exists a positive correlation between the independence of the board of directors and the disclosure of social responsibility. However, the positive quality of independent directors plays a crucial role in mitigating the negative influence of political managers on Corporate Social Responsibility. In another study, Kaymak & Bektas (2017) examined the interconnection between corporate social responsibility initiatives and corporate governance frameworks (independence, board size, dual position) at the company level. The study used Transparency International data to evaluate the transparency and disclosure standards of the most prominent multinational corporations globally. Making it a suitable agent for measuring corporate social responsibility, the results revealed the role played by the size of the board of directors and independent boards and their ability to make sound decisions and indicated a positive and close association between them and many practices of corporate social responsibility. It is a view that is consistent with agency theory, in that outside managers will assume their responsibilities to monitor senior management because they have the incentive to develop a reputation for controlling decision-making and are therefore better representatives of shareholder interests (Fama & Jensen 1983). The independence of the board of directors is supported by the interpretation of the agency owners’ theory regarding the role of boards of directors in terms of oversight, as the larger boards have a greater role in monitoring activities, and they will be less susceptible to administrative domination, thus helping to improve 193 http://ber.macrothink.org Business and Economic Research ISSN 2162-4860 2023, Vol. 13, No. 4 stakeholder representation. for the board of directors, which will lead to the promotion of social responsibility practices (Lin & Nguyen, 2022). Uyar et al. (2020) indicated that independent directors will work to enhance corporate social responsibility practices. Similar results were obtained in the Dakhli study (2021), which aimed to find out how the characteristics of the board of directors, including the independence of members, affect social responsibility in its dimensions (economic and social, environment and governance). The research was carried out to investigate 200 French-listed companies during the period 2007-2018. The findings revealed a significant and positive correlation between the independence of board members and the extent of social responsibility. In contrast to what was mentioned above, a Vu & Buranatrakul (2018) study of firms in a growing emerging economy such as Vietnam, which sampled 120 publicly listed non-financial firms from 2009-2013, the research revealed a negative correlation between board independence and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) disclosure, indicating that having independent board members might not be an effective mechanism for improving CSR disclosure. Gender diversity and the inclusion of female board members are among the extensively studied board characteristics in previous literature. Research on the relationship between gender diversity and social responsibility has produced diverse and varying results. Indeed, stakeholders such as investors and clients express a significant interest in both corporate governance and social responsibility (Zaichkowsky, 2014), where the research revealed that women tend to exhibit a higher awareness of corporate responsibility, the inclusion of women on boards of directors can have an impact on their Institutional governance in effective ways, and the most important argument was that boards of directors can enhance their efficiency by benefiting from the talents of their managers (Adams & Ferreira, 2009). Many studies produced positive results and relationships for gender diversity and social responsibility reports. Orazalin (2019) explained in his study elucidated the influence of the board of directors' characteristics, including gender diversity and social responsibility disclosures in the banking sector in Kazakhstan, where data was collected from reports The annual survey of banks listed on Kazakhstan Stock Exchange for the period 2010-2016. The research demonstrated that gender diversity has a positive effect on social responsibility reports and this shows the role of female managers in promoting the social responsibility practices of these companies. This was supported by Uyar et al. (2020) in a study, that aimed to explore whether the characteristics of the board of directors (sustainability committee, independence of the board of directors, diversity of board members, and diligence of the board of directors) contribute to an enhancement in the execution of social responsibility, and to examine whether the implementation of social responsibility positively impacts the financial aspects of companies within the hospitality and tourism sector, data was collected from the Thomson Reuters Eikon database of listed companies between 2011 and 2018, and the study concluded that the presence of female managers on the board of directors is a strong factor that drives companies to show superior performance in corporate social responsibility 194 http://ber.macrothink.org Business and Economic Research ISSN 2162-4860 2023, Vol. 13, No. 4 in all dimensions, and governance (ESG). As for the study by Peng et al. (2021), which was conducted on multinational companies (MNCs), it was revealed that gender diversity on the board of directors can effectively improve the environmental disclosure of social responsibility and the social disclosure of social responsibility, the inclusion of women on boards of directors increases the likelihood of strategic decisions focused on enhancing information transparency regarding corporate social responsibility and addressing the expectations of key stakeholders (Amorelli & García‐Sánchez, 2021), so it is believed that women represent a factor in achieving more effective corporate governance and social responsibility of organizations, consequently, this can result in a more robust and sustainable organization. It has a direct impact on the company's reputation, as highlighted by Modiba & Ngwakwe (2017), who emphasized that a higher representation of women on boards substantially contributes to environmental awareness, the study suggests that women possess genuine potential to contribute to the sustainable development of companies when afforded the opportunity to engage in board directorships and participate in decision-making processes related to sustainability. In contrast, a study by Yang et al. (2019) on Chinese companies listed in the period from 2011-2016, which the objective of the study was to investigate the correlation between the quantity and attributes of female managers and the commitment to social responsibility, confirmed that there is no statistical significance for female managers on social responsibility and that the study concluded that the impact of female managers on corporate social responsibility performance is intricate and indirect. Yarram & Adapa (2021) studied the connection between gender diversity and the positive as well as negative facets of corporate social responsibility, analyzing each dimension independently, and the study sample was taken from the components of the S & P / ASX300 index. The companies encompassed in the ASX300 index represent various segments of the market, ranging from large to medium and small enterprises. The research discovered substantiating evidence for both the critical mass theory and the token theory. Notably, the study indicated that gender diversity did not exhibit a significant correlation with the positive and negative dimensions of social responsibility when there was minimal representation of women on boards of directors. As indicated by the study of Peng et al. (2021) conducted a study on multinational companies (MNCs) included in the Forbes 2019 list, by selecting 140 samples from Japan, China, the United States, and the United Kingdom to explore the relationship between the diversity of the board of directors with its dimensions of educational background, gender diversity, and diversity of tenure to disclose social responsibility in its dimensions environmental disclosure And the social disclosure of companies, and the results demonstrated that the diversity of certificates and educational backgrounds have a positive impact on environmental issues of social responsibility, while the relationship was not significant between the diversity of certificates and social disclosure of social responsibility, so there is a better positive effect on environmental issues than social issues. Carried out by Harjoto et al. (2018) on a sample of 874 American companies for the period between 2000-2013 to assess the influence of educational degrees of board members on social responsibility. The study concluded that the diversity of educational backgrounds can improve the social performance of companies, as these companies have realized the great strategic importance of social responsibility 195 http://ber.macrothink.org Business and Economic Research ISSN 2162-4860 2023, Vol. 13, No. 4 initiatives. Corporate governance and social responsibility have always been the focus of the attention of researchers in business administration, While earlier research has explored the impact of corporate governance in fostering social responsibility, scholars have also examined the crucial correlation between various dimensions of corporate governance and social responsibility, where each dimension was taken from Dimensions of corporate governance separately to know its impact on social responsibility. Therefore, Building upon the aforementioned information, the primary hypothesis was identified, and subsequent sub-hypotheses were derived as follows: Main hypothesis: This states that "there is a statistically significant effect at a significant level (P≤0.05) for the application of corporate governance with its dimensions (board size, double CEO, independence, gender diversity, educational background diversity) on social responsibility with its dimensions combined (social responsibility towards society, social responsibility towards the environment, social responsibility towards employees, social responsibility towards customers and service quality) at the Palestine Investment Fund. It is expressed through the following sub-hypotheses: The first sub-hypothesis states that ―there is a statistically significant effect at a significant level (P≤0.05) for the size of the board of directors on social responsibility in all its dimensions combined (social responsibility towards society, social responsibility towards the environment, social responsibility towards employees, social responsibility towards customers and the quality of service) at the Palestine Investment Fund. The second sub-hypothesis states that "there is a statistically significant effect at a significant level (P≤0.05) of the CEO's duplicity on social responsibility in all its dimensions (social responsibility towards society, social responsibility towards the environment, social responsibility towards employees, social responsibility towards customers). and quality of service) at the Palestine Investment Fund. The third sub-hypothesis states: "There is a statistically significant effect at a significant level (P≤0.05) of independence on social responsibility in all its dimensions combined (social responsibility towards society, social responsibility towards the environment, social responsibility towards employees, social responsibility towards customers and service quality) The Palestinian Investment Fund. The fourth sub-hypothesis states that "there is a statistically significant effect at a significant level (P≤0.05) of gender diversity on social responsibility in all its dimensions combined (social responsibility towards society, social responsibility towards the environment, social responsibility towards employees, social responsibility towards customers and quality service) at the Palestine Investment Fund. The fifth sub-hypothesis states that "there is a statistically significant effect at a significant level (P≤0.05) for the diversity of the educational background on social responsibility with its combined dimensions (social responsibility towards society, social responsibility towards the 196 http://ber.macrothink.org Business and Economic Research ISSN 2162-4860 2023, Vol. 13, No. 4 environment, social responsibility towards employees, social responsibility towards customers and quality service) at the Palestine Investment Fund. 3. Study Methodology Based on the nature of the study and its objective of identifying the impact of corporate governance on the social responsibility of the Palestinian Investment Fund, the quantitative analytical approach was adopted. 3.1 Study Population and Sample The study population and its sample consisted of the Palestinian Investment Fund, where the data and financial reports published for the Palestinian Investment Fund that extends from the period 2006-2020 were used, noting that the Palestinian Investment Fund was established in 2003, but from 2003 to 2005, the data was not fully available in Financial reports Therefore, the data were used from the year 2006, and the data was collected by relying on the financial reports published on the official website of the Palestine Investment Fund (https://www.pif.ps/s). 3.2 Measure the Study Variables The construction of the scales for the study variables was guided by reference to previous research and studies that are related to the study variables, and relying on some scientific measures whose validity and stability have been proven in measuring these variables and their dimensions. The variables were evaluated and measured as follows: 3.2.1 The Measure of the Independent Variable In this study, corporate governance was adopted as an independent variable (Corporate Governance). Many organizations and agencies have issued indicators of corporate governance, including the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), the International Finance Corporation (IFC), and others. Some of them aim to conduct private sector business and others to conduct public sector business, and these indicators have become the basic criterion for many practices related to corporate governance in many countries, Despite the distinct objectives of the public and private sectors, fundamental disparities in these indicators are not readily apparent between the two sectors. An organization and an authority that has developed a special definition and specific principles for corporate governance. Nevertheless, all organizations and agencies aspire to reach a specific goal using corporate governance, which is the functioning of institutions within certain standards and procedures to attain operational efficiency and realize the intended objectives. In the current study, the principles of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) were used, although the Palestine Investment Fund is owned by the public sector, in its organizational structure it takes the form of a company and has a board of directors. Therefore, the appropriate principles for it were the principles of companies and not the public sector. Therefore, and based on that, and to measure corporate governance, these indicators were used, namely: 197 http://ber.macrothink.org Business and Economic Research ISSN 2162-4860 2023, Vol. 13, No. 4 Board size, CEO duality, independence, gender diversity, educational background diversity, and many studies have used these indicators to measure corporate governance, such as studies: Bae et al., 2018; Birindelli et al., 2018; Peng et al., 2021; Ludwig & Sassen, 2022; Assenga & Hussainey, 2018; Alkababji, 2019; Abu Awwad and Alkababji, 2014). Data on these indicators was gathered utilizing on the data contained in the annual reports published on the website. Table (1) indicates the indicators of corporate governance that were followed in this study: Table 1. Measuring indicators of corporate governance Variable Board size Measurement method The reviewer The count of members within the Riyadh et al., 2019; Alabdullah Board of Directors. etal., 2019; Nwude & Nwude, 2021; Mahdi et al., 2023 Alkababji, 2019 Measured by setting a value of 0 if the Assenga & Hussainey, 2018; Duplicate CEO CEO himself is not the chairman of Guerrero-Villegas et al., 2018; the board, and a value of 1 if the CEO Alabdullah et al., 2019; Jing & himself is the chairman of the board Moon, 2021 (Dummy Variables) The proportion of independent Shan, 2019; Jaidi et al., 2022; Independence members within the Board of Rashid & Hossain, 2021; Directors to the total number of board Dakhli, 2021; Mahdi et al., members. 2023 Gender diversity The percentage of female members Assenga & Hussainey, 2018; within the Board of Directors relative Orazalin, 2019; Uyar et al, to the total number of board members. 2020; Yarram & Adapa, 2021; Mahdi et al., 2023 Diversity of The Percentage of members holding Nielsen & Huse, 2010; Harjoto degrees (accounting, finance, et al., 2018; Peng et al., 2021 educational management, economics, engineering, background etc.) to the overall number of members on the Board of Directors. 3.2.2 Measurement of the Dependent Variable Social responsibility was considered as the dependent variable in this study. When creating an indicator to measure the disclosure of social responsibility, a unified method was not defined (Vu & Buranatrakul, 2018), different studies in the literature have identified measures of measurement taking into account certain aspects or dimensions of social responsibility (Gallardo-Vázquez & Sanchez-Hernandez, 2018). 2014; Alkababji, 2014), within the social responsibility disclosure literature, many studies have used reputation indicators such as 198 http://ber.macrothink.org Business and Economic Research ISSN 2162-4860 2023, Vol. 13, No. 4 global reporting initiatives, and the Dow Jones Sustainability Indexes (Rodriguez-Fernandez, 2016) as guidelines. While others adopt or adapt existing indicators or even create new indicators tailored to the needs of their research environment (Vu & Buranatrakul, 2018), it has been noted that there is no widely acknowledged or universally accepted standard to offer guidance on the selection of criteria for measuring information disclosure. In situations where identifying a satisfactory indicator or measure proves challenging, it becomes difficult to provide comprehensive guidance for institutions to fully embrace social responsibility. (Gallardo-Vázquez & Sanchez-Hernandez, 2014). The Social Responsibility Measurement Index was developed by dividing the dimensions of social responsibility into 4 dimensions (social responsibility towards society, social responsibility towards employees, social responsibility towards the environment, social responsibility towards customer quality and product quality). These dimensions were extracted from previous Arab studies (Balqat, 2020; Bakush, 2021) and Foreign Studies; Branco & Rodrigues, 2009; Nawaiseh, 2015; Tang et al., 2020; Huong, 2021; Mahdi et al., 2023; Alkababji, 2014). These dimensions were measured by dividing each dimension into 5 sub-dimensions, so we have 25 dimensions related to social responsibility, based on previous studies mentioned in the table below. The social responsibility disclosure index was measured in this study using the content analysis method for the annual financial reports by using a checklist. In this method, the extent of reporting on social responsibility is measured in the various publications of the institution, especially the annual reports, which are among the common ways to measure social responsibility by registering each element under certain categories (Zheng et al., 2022), where we developed the social responsibility index by giving "1" For each element disclosed in the annual report, and "0" if it is not, and the themes and indicators were chosen in accordance with the Palestinian environment. The first to use this method in measuring social responsibility was (Bowman & Haire, 1975), after many studies used it and proved its effectiveness in studies of social responsibility, such as (Kansal et al., 2014; Ghabayen et al., 2016). Table 2. Measurement of social responsibility indicators Variable Social responsibility towards society Social responsibility Pointer The reviewer Donations and charitable Branco & Rodrigues, 2009 activities Education support Branco & Rodrigues, 2009; Muttakin & Khan, 2014; Sports Branco & Rodrigues, 2009 the health Branco & Rodrigues, 2009; Muttakin & Khan, 2014; Arts and culture support Branco & Rodrigues, 2009 Planting trees Nawaiseh, 2015 199 http://ber.macrothink.org Business and Economic Research ISSN 2162-4860 2023, Vol. 13, No. 4 protection the Environmental programs (environmental management such as emissions management and water management) anti-pollution Environmental impact assessment Solar energy (renewable energy - natural resources and energy saving programs) Recruitment and recruitment Social responsibility policies towards employees Training towards environment Social responsibility towards customers and quality of service Malik, 2021 Branco & Rodrigues, 2009 Stojanović et al., 2016; Alkababji, 2014 Malik, 2021 Kansal et al., 2014; Nawaiseh, 2015; Branco & Rodrigues, 2009; Kansal et al., 2014; Rewards Kansal et al., 2014; Nawaiseh, 2015; The number of employees Nawaiseh, 2015 benefiting from the training courses Appreciation Kansal et al., 2014; Product quality Branco & Rodrigues, 2009; Muttakin & Khan, 2014; product safety (product Branco & Rodrigues, 2009; safety) Kansal et al., 2014; Disclosure of services Branco & Rodrigues, 2009 Improve customer service Muttakin & Khan, 2014; Tang ta al., 2020; Customer complaints and Branco & Rodrigues, 2009 communications 4. Study Model In order to study the impact between the independent variable corporate governance in its dimensions (board size, duplication of CEO, independence, gender diversity, diversity of educational background) and the dependent variable social responsibility in its dimensions combined (social responsibility towards society, social responsibility towards the environment, social responsibility towards employees, social responsibility towards customers and quality of service), the following equation was formulated: Y = a + β1X1 + β2X2 + β3X3 + β4X4 + β5X5 + ε Where : 200 http://ber.macrothink.org Business and Economic Research ISSN 2162-4860 2023, Vol. 13, No. 4 Y: Social Responsibility X5- X1: The size of the board of directors, the duality of the CEO, the independence, the diversity of the sexes, and the diversity of the educational background. e: random error 4.1 Data Analysis and Hypothesis Testing 4.1.1 Structural Equation Model Analysis Once the study model's analyzability is confirmed, the next step involves evaluating the outcomes of the structural model analysis. This includes a thorough examination of the quality and suitability of the model, along with testing the hypotheses formulated in the study. The assessment of the structural model is carried out using various criteria, such as: 4.1.2 Testing the Quality of the Study Model (Goodness of Fit) The quality of the study model underwent evaluation through the examination of the following criteria:  Coefficient of Determination: This parameter, akin to the R-square in a regression model, spans from zero to one. A value approaching 1 signifies a robust fit for the model, while a value of 0 implies a poor fit. (Saunders et al., 2007) Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR): SRMR serves as an absolute measure of relevance, reflecting the disparity between observed and estimated correlations. It is predisposed to bias in studies with limited samples and degrees of freedom, yielding larger values for such cases. The SRMR value ranges from 0 to 1, where 0 signifies impeccable fit, while 1 indicates a lack of suitability. The recommended threshold is less than 0.06 for optimal model fit. (Hu & Bentler, 1999). Table 3.Results of the study model quality analysis (Goodness of Fit) Fit statistic Value the value Size of residuals SRMR 0.000 residual volume CD 0.986 Description the description Standardized root mean squared residual The standard square root of the mean residual The coefficient of determination indicates how well do the independent variables explain the variability of the dependent variable. The analysis results of the study model's quality, specifically the Goodness of Fit, are presented in Table (3). The findings indicate that the study model demonstrates a high level of suitability or quality. This is evidenced by the determination coefficient value of (0.986) and the standard square root of the mean of the residuals registering (0.000). Both of these values 201 http://ber.macrothink.org Business and Economic Research ISSN 2162-4860 2023, Vol. 13, No. 4 fall within the recommended range, affirming the robustness of the study model. These favorable results suggest that the study model is well-fitted to the data, paving the way for the subsequent testing of the study hypotheses. The high determination coefficient signifies a strong relationship between the model and the observed outcomes, while the minimal standard square root of the mean of the residuals indicates the model's effective ability to explain variations in the data. In light of these findings, there is a solid foundation for confidence in the study model's reliability, providing a green light to proceed with hypothesis testing. 4.2 Pearson Correlation Matrix The correlation matrix presented in Table (4) reveals the following findings: the correlation coefficients between the independent variables and the dependent variable (social responsibility) exhibit a range from weak to moderate, encompassing both negative and positive associations. Specifically, the analysis of the correlation matrix indicates that the correlation between dual position and social responsibility is negative and moderate. Furthermore, the correlation matrix table demonstrates a weak but positive relationship between gender diversity and social responsibility. Additionally, the results within the correlation matrix table suggest a weak and negative correlation between the size of the board of directors and social responsibility. In a similar vein, the correlation matrix analysis highlights a weak and negative association between the diversity of educational backgrounds and social responsibility. Lastly, the correlation between independence and social responsibility is observed to be weak and negative. These outcomes collectively emphasize the nuanced nature of the relationships, reflecting a spectrum from weak to moderate correlations, both positive and negative, among the variables under consideration. Table 4. Correlation Matrix Analysis variants 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 1. social responsibility -0.481 1 2. Double position 0.026 -0.344 1 3. Gender diversity -0.03 0.225 0.194 1 4. board size 1 5. Diversity of educational background -0.19 -0.155 -0.306 -0.720 -0.043 -0.162 0.279 0.487 -0.377 1 6. independence 4.3 Testing the Hypotheses of the Study Once the model's validity has been confirmed, the study proceeds to test its hypotheses. The primary objective is to assess the influence of corporate governance, considering various dimensions such as board size, dual CEO roles, independence, gender diversity, and diversity of educational background. The focus is on understanding the impact of these governance aspects on social responsibility across multiple dimensions, encompassing societal, 202 http://ber.macrothink.org Business and Economic Research ISSN 2162-4860 2023, Vol. 13, No. 4 environmental, employee-related, customer-centric, and service quality dimensions. The investigation aims to unravel the intricate relationships between corporate governance and social responsibility. This examination is conducted in accordance with the study conducted by Benitez et al. in 2020. The hypotheses formulated in the study are subjected to rigorous testing using the following methodologies: 1. Beta Coefficient: The beta coefficient is a crucial metric for assessing the impact of each independent variable on the dependent factor. The value and sign of the beta coefficient indicate the expected effect on the dependent variable. A positive beta suggests a positive relationship, while a negative beta implies a negative relationship. Furthermore, the magnitude of the beta coefficient provides insights into the size of the change in the dependent variable resulting from a unit change in the independent variable, holding other factors constant. This parameter is instrumental in gauging the strength and direction of the relationships within the model. 2. Statistical Significance (P-Values): The P-values associated with each beta coefficient are pivotal for determining the statistical significance of the relationships. A P-value less than 5% (commonly denoted by a significance level of 0.05) is often used as a threshold for significance. If the P-value is below this threshold, it suggests that the observed relationship is unlikely to have occurred by chance alone. In the context of hypothesis testing, a low P-value provides evidence to reject the null hypothesis, supporting the notion that there is a significant relationship between the independent and dependent variables. 3. T-Statisticstest: To evaluate the statistical significance of the hypotheses, it is essential to analyze whether the obtained results hold statistical significance or not. Comparing the computed T-statistic values with the tabular value (1.96) at a significance level of 5% allows for the determination of whether to accept the alternative hypothesis. The point is further elucidated by the outcomes of the hypothesis testing analysis as demonstrated in Table (5). Table 5. Results of the analysis of the impact hypotheses tested by the structural Equation Model SSR Social Responsibility Unstandardized Beta coefficients 0.09288 FSIZE board size -0.53913 Duplication of CEO DUL -5.8082 FINDE autonomy -0.07167 Gender Diversity FM FDCR educational background diversity -0.41574 0.819754 Constant T-Statistics P Values 8.49 -16.03 -21.9 -2.65 -1.58 22.2 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.008 0.113 0.000 Main Hypothesis Test: This states that "there is a statistically significant effect at a significant level (P≤0.05) for the application of corporate governance with its dimensions (board size, double CEO, independence, gender diversity, educational background diversity) on social 203 http://ber.macrothink.org Business and Economic Research ISSN 2162-4860 2023, Vol. 13, No. 4 responsibility with its dimensions combined (social responsibility towards society, social responsibility towards the environment, social responsibility towards employees, social responsibility towards customers and service quality) at the Palestine Investment Fund. To test the main hypothesis, the following sub-hypotheses were tested: Testing the first sub-hypothesis: It is noted in Table No. (5) above, a positive effect of the board's size on social responsibility is observed, with a Beta coefficient of (β= 0.0928801). This value is statistically significant at the significance level (P-value = .000), which is less than (0.05). Additionally, the calculated (T-Value) is (8.49), exceeding the tabular value (1.96). Therefore, the alternative hypothesis is accepted, suggesting that ―there is a statistically significant effect at a significant level (P≤0.05) of the size of the board of directors on the social responsibility of the Palestinian Investment Fund‖ In practical terms, it can be inferred that a 1% increase in the board size within the Palestinian Investment Fund corresponds to a 9% increase in the practice of social responsibility while keeping all other variables constant. Testing the second sub-hypothesis: Which states that "there is a statistically significant effect at a significant level (P≤0.05) of the CEO's duplicity on social responsibility in its combined dimensions (social responsibility towards society, social responsibility towards the environment, social responsibility towards employees, social responsibility towards customers and service quality) of Palestinian Investment Fund. It is noted in Table No. (5) that there is a negative impact of holding a dual position on social responsibility, evidenced by the Beta coefficient of (β= -0.5391256). This coefficient is statistically significant at the significance level (P-value = 0.000), which is less than (0.05). Additionally, the calculated (T-Value) is (-16.03), surpassing the tabular value (1.96). Consequently, the alternative hypothesis is affirmed: "There is a statistically significant effect at a significant level (P≤0.05) of the CEO's duplicity on the social responsibility of the Palestinian Investment Fund". In practical terms, an increase of 1% in the variable of dual CEO within the Palestinian Investment Fund is associated with a 53% decrease in the practice of social responsibility, while maintaining all other variables constant. Testing the third sub-hypothesis: This states that "there is a statistically significant effect at a significant level (P≤0.05) of independence on social responsibility with its combined dimensions (social responsibility towards society, social responsibility towards the environment, social responsibility towards employees, social responsibility towards customers and service quality) at the investment fund Palestinian. It is noted in Table No. (5), it is evident that the independence of the board of directors has a negative impact on social responsibility, as indicated by the Beta coefficient of (β= -5.808201). This coefficient is statistically significant at the significance level (P-value = .000), which is less than (0.05). Furthermore, the calculated (T-Value) is (-21.90), surpassing the tabular value (1.96). Consequently, the alternative hypothesis is supported, ―there is a statistically significant effect at a significant level (P≤0.05) of the independence of the board of directors on the social responsibility of the Palestinian Investment Fund‖. In practical terms, a 1% increase in the 204 http://ber.macrothink.org Business and Economic Research ISSN 2162-4860 2023, Vol. 13, No. 4 variable of the independence of the board of directors within the Palestinian Investment Fund corresponds to a substantial 500% reduction in the practice of social responsibility, while holding all other variables constant. Testing the fourth sub-hypothesis: Which states that ―there is a statistically significant effect at a significant level (P≤0.05) of the gender diversity of the members of the Board of Directors on the social responsibility in its combined dimensions (social responsibility towards society, social responsibility towards the environment, social responsibility towards employees, social responsibility towards customers and the quality of service) at the Palestine Investment Fund. It is noted in Table No. (5), it is evident that gender diversity has a negative impact on social responsibility, illustrated by the Beta coefficient of (β= -0.0716709). This coefficient is statistically significant at the significance level (P-value = 0.008). Additionally, the calculated (T-Value) is (-2.56), exceeding the tabular value (1.96). Consequently, the alternative hypothesis is validated, ―there is a statistically significant effect at a significant level (P≤0.05) of the gender diversity on the social responsibility of the Palestinian Investment Fund‖. In practical terms, a 1% increase in the variable of gender diversity within the Palestinian Investment Fund is associated with a 7% decrease in the practice of social responsibility, while holding all other variables constant. Testing the fifth sub-hypothesis: This states that "there is a statistically significant effect at a significant level (P≤0.05) for the diversity of the educational background of the council members on social responsibility in its combined dimensions (social responsibility towards society, social responsibility towards the environment, social responsibility towards employees, social responsibility towards customers and quality of service ) at the Palestinian Investment Fund. It is noted in Table No. (5), there is a negative effect of the diversity of the educational background of the council members on social responsibility, with a Beta coefficient of (β= -0.4157424). However, it's noteworthy that this effect is not statistically significant at the significance level (P-value = 0.113), which exceeds (0.05). Additionally, the calculated (T-Value) is (-1.58), falling below the tabular value (1.96). Therefore, the hypothesis that ―there is a statistically significant effect at a significant level (P≤0.05) of the educational background on the social responsibility of the Palestinian Investment Fund‖ cannot be accepted. In this context, the null hypothesis is affirmed, suggesting that "There is no direct statistically significant effect at a significant level (P≤0.05) for the diversity of educational background on the social responsibility of the Palestinian Investment Fund." 5. Discussing Conclusions and Recommendations 5.1 The Main Findings The results of board size were consistent with stakeholder theory, supporting the argument posited that the primary objective of the board of directors is to fulfill the needs of 205 http://ber.macrothink.org Business and Economic Research ISSN 2162-4860 2023, Vol. 13, No. 4 stakeholders (Donaldson & Preston, 1995). Indeed, in accordance with resource theory, an expanded board of directors is believed to improve the efficiency of strategic decision-making and facilitate communication with the external environment (Madhani, 2017), as executive managers may begin to prioritize the interests of the organization rather than their own interests only, along with increasing the size of the board of directors. The argument in this relationship is that the larger boards of directors have the ability to collect and process information in a timely manner to ensure joint and appropriate coordination between the institution and the environment (Tulung & Ramdani, 2018). The result of duplication also aligns with the principles of agency theory, which posits that having overlapping roles between the CEO and the chairman of the board of directors may tempt the president to prioritize their own interests over the broader interests of the organization (Assenga et al., 2018). The theory, as presented by Fama and Jensen (1983), asserts that non-executive members on the board of directors contribute to more efficient organizational management. The rationale behind this is that the duplication of roles weakens the board of directors. The study indicates that enhancing independence in the board of directors may not always be optimal, and its influence may not consistently yield positive outcomes across all organizational activities. It can be said that the presence of independent board members in the board is not necessarily for better social performance but for better corporate governance (Alkababji, 2019). Although the agency theory has strengthened the role of women on the board of directors and encouraged diversity between the sexes (Carter et al., 2010). However, in Palestine, we notice there is an inadequate representation of women on boards of directors, falling below the required level. Therefore, the findings of this study are connected to the observation that, despite women harboring constructive and innovative ideas, considering them as a minority on the board of directors and their insufficient representation therein may diminish their standing and impede the recognition of their viewpoints. And because the board of directors is usually composed of males, many women have not gone through such experiences, and this is likely because they do not have sufficient experience and ideas about the importance of taking into account the surrounding environment and its impact on the institution. That is why the agency theory called for the need for women to be represented on boards of directors (Bennouri et al., 2018) for them to have sufficient experience and thus benefit from their latent skills, as the study of Ghabayen et al. (2016) negative impact on the extent of social responsibility disclosure. Regarding the diversity of the educational background, the result is attributed, but it is possible that the Board of Directors is the most homogeneous in knowledge and the most homogeneous in academic degrees, and can make decisions and provide the necessary advice to reach the ideal results, so they will have similar interests and ideas, and therefore the opinions of the members of the Board of Directors will converge in what related to the issues raised. A study by Peng et al. (2021) disclosed that the diversity of educational background has a positive effect on some issues of social responsibility, such as environmental issues, the present study diverged from the study of Harjoto et al. (2018), which concluded that the diversity of educational skills improves social performance. 206 http://ber.macrothink.org Business and Economic Research ISSN 2162-4860 2023, Vol. 13, No. 4 5.2 The Managerial Implications It is clear from the foregoing that the composition of the board of directors has an important impact on social responsibility, so institutions must establish boards of directors with an appropriate number of members so that the CEOs do not occupy the position of chairman of the board of directors while trying to reduce the presence of independent members, because these members and according to outcomes of the present study, they do not promote the practice of social responsibility, furthermore, that gender diversity does not contribute positively to the advancement of social responsibility, and the diversity of educational background has no effect. The current study recommends that regulators and responsible parties make a code of corporate governance principles mandatory for all institutions of all forms. In addition, institutions, especially governmental ones, make annual assessments of the performance of institutional governance and it is recommended to compare these findings with those of previous years to facilitate further development. Simultaneously, efforts should be directed towards addressing the determinants influencing the observed trends. In addition, institutions prepare financial statements and complementary clarifications, which are important to the decision-maker and stakeholders so that they have a clear perception of the institution’s status and system with regard to aspects of social responsibility, and encourage institutions to adopt social responsibility activities to try to create an institutional culture that is aware of society, and include this within its strategies and objectives. The study also recommends diversifying the programs and activities conducted by the Palestinian Investment Fund within the framework of social responsibility. This diversification should encompass various aspects related to both the internal and external environment, with emphasis on all segments of society. 5.3 The Research Limitations The current study interpreted certain dimensions of corporate governance and did not take into account all the dimensions, due to their lack of availability in financial reports. There is a weakness in disclosing other dimensions of corporate governance, and the results related to this study are related only to the Palestine Investment Fund, in view of this, may There be concern about the generalizability of the results. 5.4 The Future Research Directions It is possible to attempt to conduct future studies that rely on modifying or mediating variables that control the relationship more clearly. The case study can also be expanded to include other institutions with economic influence in Palestine. Acknowledgments Special thanks to Palestine Technical University – Kadoorie and Al-Quds Open University for their Moral Support in encouraging scientific research. Author contributions 207 http://ber.macrothink.org Business and Economic Research ISSN 2162-4860 2023, Vol. 13, No. 4 All authors contributed to the study's conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by [Bahaa Subhi Awwad], [Majdi Wael Alkababji], and [Shatha Zidan]. Funding No funding was received to assist with the preparation of this manuscript. Competing interests The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. Data availability statement Data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions. Data sharing statement No additional data are available. Open access This is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Copyrights Copyright for this article is retained by the author(s), with first publication rights granted to the journal. References Abu, A., Baha S., & Alkababji, M. W. (2014). The Impact of Institutional Governance on the Financial Performance of Palestinian Commercial Banks: An Empirical Study. Arab Journal of Administrative Sciences, 21(3), 521-556. Abu, A., Moaz, J., & Barham, A. (2022). The Impact of Earnings Management and Corporate Governance on the Relationship between Disclosure of Corporate Social Responsibility of Companies Listed in the Palestine Stock Exchange and Firm Value. Journal of An-Najah University for Research - Political Sciences, 36(11), 2313-2358. https://doi.org/10.35552/0247-036-011-002 Abu, S., & Khalil, S. M. (2018). Measuring the Impact of Governance Mechanisms on Enhancing Corporate Social Responsibility. Irbid for Research and Studies, 20(1), 1-59. Adams, R. B., & Ferreira, D. (2009). Women in the boardroom and their impact on governance and performance. Journal of financial economics, 94(2), 291-309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2008.10.007 208 http://ber.macrothink.org Business and Economic Research ISSN 2162-4860 2023, Vol. 13, No. 4 Alabdullah, T. T. Y., Ahmed, E. R., & Muneerali, M. (2019). Effect of board size and duality on corporate social responsibility: what has improved in corporate governance in Asia? Journal of Accounting Science, 3(2), 121-135. https://doi.org/10.21070/jas.v3i2.2810 Alkababji, M. W. (2019). The Role of Corporate Governance in Regulating Profit Management Practices in Palestinian Public Shareholding Industrial Companies: A Field Study. Arab Journal of Administration. League of Arab States, 39(2). Alkababji. W. M. (2014). Voluntary Disclosure on Corporate Social Responsibility: A Study on the Annual Reports of Palestinian Corporations. European Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance Research, 2(4), 59-82. Al-Khdash, H. A-D. M., & Al-Washli, A. R. H. (2019). Board Diversity and Its Impact on the Performance of Companies Listed on the Amman Stock Exchange: The Case of Banks and Insurance Companies. Jordanian Journal of Business Administration, 15(4), 467-487. Al-Lawi, Y. A., Fohma, Y., & Nsaira, B. (2020). Accounting for Corporate Social Responsibility and its Disclosure in Financial Statements - Presentation of a Group of Models. Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development, 3(1), 127-141. Al-Zahra, M. F. (2020). The Reality of Corporate Social Responsibility and its Commitment to ISO 26000 in Algeria. Journal of Labor and Employment Law, 5(4), 21-46. Amorelli, M. F., & Garcia‐Sánchez, I. M. (2021). Trends in the dynamic evolution of board gender diversity and corporate social responsibility. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 28(2), 537-554.‫ ‏‬https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2079 Amran, A., Lee, S. P., & Devi, S. S. (2013). The influence of governance structure and strategic corporate social responsibility toward sustainability reporting quality. Business Strategy and the Environment, 23(4), 217-235.‫ ‏‬https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.1767 Annual Reports. (2021). Palestinian Investment Fund. Online Available: https://www.pif.ps/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/PIF-Annual-AR-2019-web.pdf Assenga, M. P., Aly, D., & Hussainey, K. (2018). The impact of board characteristics on the financial performance of Tanzanian firms. Corporate Governance: The international journal of business in society.‫ ‏‬https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-09-2016-0174 Bae, S. M., Masud, M. A. K., & Kim, J. D. (2018). A cross-country investigation of corporate governance and corporate sustainability disclosure: A signaling theory perspective. Sustainability, 10(8), 2611.‫ ‏‬https://doi.org/10.3390/su10082611 Bakoush, L. (2021). The Synergy between Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Governance: An Exploratory Study Using Anfiff. Journal of Strategy and Development. Faculty of Economic and Commercial Sciences and Management Sciences, Abdelhamid Ibn Badis University, 11(2), 106-124. Belqat, A. A. (2020). The Impact of Corporate Governance on Achieving Social Responsibility in the Algerian Insurance Sector: Case of Insurance Companies CAAT, CAAR, 209 http://ber.macrothink.org Business and Economic Research ISSN 2162-4860 2023, Vol. 13, No. 4 SAA. Open Jerusalem University Journal for Administrative and Economic Research, 15(13), 48-64. Benitez, J., Henseler, J., Castillo, A., & Schuberth, F. (2020). How to perform and report an impactful analysis using partial least squares: Guidelines for confirmatory and explanatory IS research. Information & Management, 57(2), 103168.‫‏‬ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2019.05.003 Bennouri, M., Chtioui, T., Nagati, H., & Nekhili, M. (2018). Female board directorship and firm performance: What really matters?, Journal of Banking & Finance, 88, 267-291.‫‏‬ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2017.12.010 Birindelli, G., Dell'Atti, S., Iannuzzi, A. P., & Savioli, M. (2018). Composition and activity of the board of directors: Impact on ESG performance in the banking system. Sustainability, 10(12), 4699.‫ ‏‬https://doi.org/10.3390/su10124699 Borlea, S. N., Achim, M. V., & Mare, C. (2017). Board characteristics and firm performance in emerging economies. Lessons from Romania. Economic research-Ekonomska istraživanja, 30(1), 55-75. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2017.1291359 Bowman, E. H., & Haire, M. (1975). A strategic posture toward corporate social responsibility. California Management Review, 18(2), 49-58.‫ ‏‬https://doi.org/10.2307/41164638 Branco, M. C., & Rodrigues, L. L. (2009). Exploring the importance of social responsibility disclosure for human resources. Journal of Human Resource Costing & Accounting.‫‏‬ Bukair, A. A., & Rahman, A. A. (2015). The effect of the board of directors' characteristics on corporate social responsibility disclosure by Islamic banks. Journal of Management Research, 7(2), 506. https://doi.org/10.5296/jmr.v7i2.6989 Carter, D. A., D'Souza, F., Simkins, B. J., & Simpson, W. G. (2010). The gender and ethnic diversity of US boards and board committees and firm financial performance. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 18(5), 396-414. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8683.2010.00809.x Code of Corporate Governance in Palestine. (2009). Online Available: https://www.abp.ps/public/files/server/20121312123242.pdf Dakhli, A. (2021). Does financial performance moderate the relationship between board attributes and corporate social responsibility in French firms? Journal of Global Responsibility. https://doi.org/10.1108/JGR-02-2021-0016 Dias, A., Lima Rodrigues, L., & Craig, R. (2017). Corporate governance effects on social responsibility disclosures. Australasian Accounting, Business and Finance Journal, 11(2), 3-22. https://doi.org/10.14453/aabfj.v11i2.2 Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65-91.‫‏‬ https://doi.org/10.2307/258887 210 http://ber.macrothink.org Business and Economic Research ISSN 2162-4860 2023, Vol. 13, No. 4 Erawati, N. M. A., Hariadi, B., & Saraswati, E. (2021). The Role of Corporate Social Responsibility in the Investment Efficiency: Is It Important? The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics, and Business, 8(1), 169-178. Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1983). Agency problems and residual claims. The Journal of Law and Economics, 26(2), 327-349. https://doi.org/10.1086/467038 Gallardo-Vázquez, D., & Sanchez-Hernandez, M. I. (2014). Measuring Corporate Social Responsibility for competitive success at a regional level. Journal of Cleaner Production, 72, 14-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.02.051 Ghabayen, M. A., Mohamad, N. R., & Ahmad, N. (2016). Board characteristics and corporate social responsibility disclosure in the Jordanian banks. Corporate Board: role, duties and composition, 12(1), 84-99.‫ ‏‬https://doi.org/10.22495/cbv12i1c1art2 Guerrero-Villegas, J., Pérez-Calero, L., Hurtado-González, J. M., & Giráldez-Puig, P. (2018). Board attributes and corporate social responsibility disclosure: A meta-analysis. Sustainability, 10(12), 4808.‫ ‏‬https://doi.org/10.3390/su10124808 Hammadi, H. J., & Jassim, M. R. (2022). The Effect Of The Demographic Characteristics Of The Board Of Directors On The Quality Of Receivables: A Study On A Sample Of Companies Listed In The Iraqi Stock Exchange. Specialusis Ugdymas, 1(43), 1127-1140.‫‏‬ Harjoto, M. A., Laksmana, I., & Wen Yang, Y. (2018). Board nationality and educational background diversity and corporate social performance. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society.‫ ‏‬https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-04-2018-0138 Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural equation modeling: a multidisciplinary journal, 6(1), 1-55.‫ ‏‬https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118 -Huong, N. T. L., Tran, NM, & Vu, MC (2021). The influence of board characteristics and state holding on corporate social responsibility disclosure, evidence from Vietnamese listed firms. Business: Theory and Practice, 22(1), 190-201.‫ ‏‬https://doi.org/10.3846/btp.2021.13490 Jaidi, J., Wenhao, M., & Mohidin, R. (2022). Board independence, corporate social responsibility and firm performance: evidence from China. International Journal of Banking and Finance, 17(1), 109-130.‫ ‏‬https://doi.org/10.32890/ijbf2022.17.1.5 Jing, L., & Moon, J. (2021). Airline chief executive officer and corporate social responsibility. Sustainability, 13(15), 8599.‫ ‏‬https://doi.org/10.3390/su13158599 Kansal, M., Joshi, M., & Batra, G. S. (2014). Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosures: Evidence from India. Advances in Accounting, 30(1), 217-229.‫‏‬ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adiac.2014.03.009 Kaymak, T., & Bektas, E. (2017). Corporate social responsibility and governance: Information disclosure in multinational corporations. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 24(6), 555-569.‫ ‏‬https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1428 211 http://ber.macrothink.org Business and Economic Research ISSN 2162-4860 2023, Vol. 13, No. 4 Lin, C. C., & Nguyen, T. P. (2022). Board attributes and corporate social responsibility performance: evidence from Vietnam. Cogent Business & Management, 9(1), 2087461. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2022.2087461 Ludwig, P., & Sassen, R. (2022). Which internal corporate governance mechanisms drive corporate sustainability? . Journal of Environmental Management, 301, 113780.‫‏‬ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113780 Madhani, P. M. (2017). Diverse roles of the corporate board: Review of various corporate governance theories. The IUP Journal of Corporate Governance, 16(2), 7-28.‫‏‬ Madini, O., & Yaghni, S. (2020). The Impact of Social Intelligence on Embracing Social Responsibility: A Study of a Sample of Private Sector Doctors. Journal of Administrative and Financial Sciences, El-Wadi Hamma University, 4(1), 73-84. Mahdi, S. M. A., Al-Absy, M. S. M., & Alastal, A. Y. (2023). Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm’s Performance: Evidence from Bahrain. In International Conference on Business and Technology (pp. 957-967). Springer, Cham.‫ ‏‬https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-08954-1_80 Malik, F., Wang, F., Naseem, M. A., Ikram, A., & Ali, S. (2020). Determinants of corporate social responsibility related to CEO attributes: An empirical study. Sage Open, 10(1), 2158244019899093.‫ ‏‬https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019899093 Malik, S. Y., Hayat Mughal, Y., Azam, T., Cao, Y., Wan, Z., Zhu, H., & Thurasamy, R. (2021). Corporate social responsibility, green human resources management, and sustainable performance: is organizational citizenship behavior towards the environment the missing link? Sustainability, 13(3), 1044.‫ ‏‬https://doi.org/10.3390/su13031044 Modiba, E. M., & Ngwakwe, C. C. (2017). Women on the corporate board of directors and corporate sustainability disclosure. Corporate Board: Role, Duties & Composition, 13(2), 32-37. https://doi.org/10.22495/cbv13i2art3 Muttakin, M. B., & Khan, A. (2014). Determinants of corporate social disclosure: Empirical evidence from Bangladesh. Advances in accounting, 30(1), 168-175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adiac.2014.03.005 Nawaiseh, M. E. (2015). Do Firm Size and Financial Performance Affect Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure: Employees' and Environmental Dimensions? . American Journal of Applied Sciences, 12(12), 967.‫ ‏‬https://doi.org/10.3844/ajassp.2015.967.981 Nielsen, S., & Huse, M. (2010). Women directors' contribution to board decision‐making and strategic involvement: The role of equality perception. European Management Review, 7(1), 16-29.‫ ‏‬https://doi.org/10.1057/emr.2009.27 Nwude, E. C., & Nwude, C. A. (2021). Board structure and corporate social responsibility: evidence from developing economy. SAGE Open, 11(1), 2158244020988543.‫‏‬ https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020988543 OECD. (2015). G20/OECD Principles of Corporate Governance. 212 http://ber.macrothink.org Business and Economic Research ISSN 2162-4860 2023, Vol. 13, No. 4 https://doi.org/10.1002/bl.30032 Orazalin, N. (2019). Corporate governance and corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure in an emerging economy: evidence from commercial banks of Kazakhstan. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society.‫‏‬ https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-09-2018-0290 Peng, X., Yang, Z., Shao, J., & Li, X. (2021). Board diversity and corporate social responsibility disclosure of multinational corporations. Applied Economics, 53(42), 4884-4898.‫ ‏‬https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2021.1910620 Rashid, M. H. U., & Hossain, S. Z. (2021). Does board independence moderate the effect of politician directors on CSR disclosure? Evidence from the publicly listed banks in Bangladesh. Social Responsibility Journal.‫ ‏‬https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-08-2020-0320 Riyadh, H. A., Sukoharsono, E. G., & Alfaiza, S. A. (2019). The impact of corporate social responsibility disclosure and board characteristics on corporate performance. Cogent Business & Management, 6(1), 1647917. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2019.1647917 Rodriguez-Fernandez, M. (2016). Social responsibility and financial performance: The role of good corporate governance. BRQ Business Research Quarterly, 19(2), 137-151.‫‏‬ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brq.2015.08.001 Salim, A. M., & Al-Shuwaehdi, A. A. (2020). The Reality of Implementing Social Responsibility Accounting at Al-Jumhuria Bank - Derna (An Approaching Study). International Journal of Research in Educational, Humanitarian, Literature and Language Sciences. University of Basra and Ramah Research and Development Center for Human Resources, 1(5), 401-452. Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2007). Principles and practices of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). In Methodology in the Social Sciences. [Online] Available: www.guilford.com/MSS Schwartz, M. S., & Carroll, A. B. (2003). Corporate social responsibility: A three-domain approach. Business Ethics Quarterly, 503-530. https://doi.org/10.5840/beq200313435 Shan, Y. G. (2019). Managerial ownership, board independence and firm performance. Accounting Research Journal.‫ ‏‬https://doi.org/10.1108/ARJ-09-2017-0149 Shayan, F., Nasrin, K., Sepideh, A., & Mohammad, Z. (2022). Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as a Framework for Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). Sustainability, 14, 1222. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031222 Stojanović, A., Mihajlović, I., & Schulte, P. (2016). Corporate social responsibility: Environmental aspects. In International May Conference on Strategic Management-IMKSM2016. Bor, Serbia.‫‏‬ Tandoh, I., Duffour, K. A., Essandoh, M., & Amoako, R. N. (2022). Corporate Governance, Corporate Social Responsibility, and Corporate Sustainability: The Moderating Role of Top 213 http://ber.macrothink.org Business and Economic Research ISSN 2162-4860 2023, Vol. 13, No. 4 Management Commitment. International Journal of Corporate Governance. https://doi.org/10.26668/businessreview/2022.v7i2.309 Tang, P., Yang, S., & Yang, S. (2020). How to design corporate governance structures to enhance corporate social responsibility in China's mining state-owned enterprises? Resources Policy, 66, 101619. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2020.101619 Tulung, J. E., & Ramdani, D. (2018). Independence, size and performance of the board: An emerging market research. Corporate Ownership & Control, 15(2). https://doi.org/10.22495/cocv15i2c1p6 Uyar, A., Kilic, M., Koseoglu, M. A., Kuzey, C., & Karaman, A. S. (2020). The link among board characteristics, corporate social responsibility performance, and financial performance: Evidence from the hospitality and tourism industry. Tourism Management Perspectives, 35, 100714. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2020.100714 Vu, K. A., & Buranatrakul, T. (2018). Corporate social responsibility disclosure in Vietnam: A longitudinal study. DLSU Business & Economics Review, 27(2), 147-165.‫‏‬ Vuong, Q. H., La, V. P., Nguyen, H. K. T., Ho, M. T., Vuong, T. T., & Ho, M.T. (2021). Identifying the moral–practical gaps in corporate social responsibility missions of Vietnamese firms: An event‐based analysis of sustainability feasibility. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 28(1), 30-41.‫ ‏‬https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2029 World Business Council For Sustainable Development (WBCSD). (2019). In: The State of Corporate Governance in the Era of Sustainability Risks and Opportunities. [Online] Available: https://docs.wbcsd.org/2019/03/WBCSDThe_state_of_corporate_governance_in_the_era_of_ sustainability_risks_and_opportunities.pdf Worokinasih, S., & Zaini, ML Z. B. M. (2020). The Mediating Role of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Disclosure on Good Corporate Governance (GCG) and Firm Value. A Technical Note. Australasian Accounting, Business and Finance Journal, 14(1), 88-96.‫‏‬ https://doi.org/10.14453/aabfj.v14i1.9 Yang, W., Yang, J., & Gao, Z. (2019). Do female board directors promote corporate social responsibility? An empirical study based on the critical mass theory. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 55(15), 3452-3471.‫ ‏‬https://doi.org/10.1080/1540496X.2019.1657402 Yarram, S. R., & Adapa, S. (2021). Board gender diversity and corporate social responsibility: Is there a case for critical mass?. Journal of cleaner production, 278, 123319.‫‏‬ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123319 Zaichkowsky, J. L. (2014). Women in the board room: One can make a difference. International Journal of Business Governance and Ethics, 9(1), 91-113.‫‏‬ https://doi.org/10.1504/IJBGE.2014.062774 Zaman, R., Jain, T., Samara, G., & Jamali, D. (2022). Corporate governance meets corporate social responsibility: Mapping the interface. Business & Society, 61(3), 690-752.‫‏‬ 214 http://ber.macrothink.org Business and Economic Research ISSN 2162-4860 2023, Vol. 13, No. 4 https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650320973415 Zheng, Y., Rashid, M. H. U., Siddik, A. B., Wei, W., & Hossain, S. Z. (2022). Corporate social responsibility disclosure and firm’s productivity: evidence from the banking industry in Bangladesh. Sustainability, 14(10), 6237.‫ ‏‬https://doi.org/10.3390/su14106237 215 http://ber.macrothink.org