The use of ESG scores in academic literature: a systematic literature review

IF 2.4 Q3 BUSINESS
Alexandre Clément, É. Robinot, Léo Trespeuch
{"title":"The use of ESG scores in academic literature: a systematic literature review","authors":"Alexandre Clément, É. Robinot, Léo Trespeuch","doi":"10.1108/jec-10-2022-0147","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nEnvironmental, social and governance (ESG) scores are becoming increasingly relevant in academic literature and the corporate world. This is partly because the themes covered by ESG scores are intended to resolve multiple major social and environmental issues. However, there is little consensus among academics about the definition of ESG scores and their measures. Many scholars have used ESG scores to represent various issues. The purpose of this study is to gather all definitions that were used by scholar when using ESG scores in their research.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThis systematic literature review aims to identify how ESG scores are presented in the academic literature. A total of 4,145 articles were identified, of which 342 articles from influential peer-reviewed journals were retained.\n\n\nFindings\nIn the articles, five different thematic definitions emerged in terms of how scholars have used ESG scores in their research: sustainability, corporate social responsibility, disclosure, finance and the analysis of ESG scores. Although some definitions are consistent with the methodologies of the agencies that produce ESG scores, others raise further questions. Caution is required when using ESG scores as a metric. They represent financial adjusted risk-return for some and are used to express business sustainability for others.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nOnly top-ranked journals were analyzed. In addition, only the key terms “ESG Score” and “ESG Scores” were used to gather all research papers.\n\n\nPractical implications\nResearchers could improve the accuracy of their results by developing specific methodologies that are closely related to the issues intended to be measured. The underlying variables composing the ESG scores could be used instead of the final score for more accurate environmental or social issues measurements.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThis research shows that scholars use ESG scores to represent multiple issues that are not always captured by ESG scores’ official methodologies. ESG scores can express the overall performance of environmental and social issues, but they cannot be used to track specific underlying issues.\n","PeriodicalId":46489,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Enterprising Communities-People and Places in the Global Economy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Enterprising Communities-People and Places in the Global Economy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jec-10-2022-0147","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Purpose Environmental, social and governance (ESG) scores are becoming increasingly relevant in academic literature and the corporate world. This is partly because the themes covered by ESG scores are intended to resolve multiple major social and environmental issues. However, there is little consensus among academics about the definition of ESG scores and their measures. Many scholars have used ESG scores to represent various issues. The purpose of this study is to gather all definitions that were used by scholar when using ESG scores in their research. Design/methodology/approach This systematic literature review aims to identify how ESG scores are presented in the academic literature. A total of 4,145 articles were identified, of which 342 articles from influential peer-reviewed journals were retained. Findings In the articles, five different thematic definitions emerged in terms of how scholars have used ESG scores in their research: sustainability, corporate social responsibility, disclosure, finance and the analysis of ESG scores. Although some definitions are consistent with the methodologies of the agencies that produce ESG scores, others raise further questions. Caution is required when using ESG scores as a metric. They represent financial adjusted risk-return for some and are used to express business sustainability for others. Research limitations/implications Only top-ranked journals were analyzed. In addition, only the key terms “ESG Score” and “ESG Scores” were used to gather all research papers. Practical implications Researchers could improve the accuracy of their results by developing specific methodologies that are closely related to the issues intended to be measured. The underlying variables composing the ESG scores could be used instead of the final score for more accurate environmental or social issues measurements. Originality/value This research shows that scholars use ESG scores to represent multiple issues that are not always captured by ESG scores’ official methodologies. ESG scores can express the overall performance of environmental and social issues, but they cannot be used to track specific underlying issues.
ESG评分在学术文献中的应用:系统的文献综述
在学术文献和企业界,环境、社会和治理(ESG)得分正变得越来越重要。部分原因是ESG评分所涵盖的主题旨在解决多个重大的社会和环境问题。然而,学术界对ESG分数的定义及其衡量标准几乎没有达成共识。许多学者使用ESG分数来代表各种问题。本研究的目的是收集学者在研究中使用ESG分数时所使用的所有定义。设计/方法/方法本系统的文献综述旨在确定ESG分数如何在学术文献中呈现。共确定了4145篇文章,其中342篇来自有影响力的同行评议期刊。根据学者们在研究中如何使用ESG分数,文章中出现了五种不同的主题定义:可持续性、企业社会责任、信息披露、财务和ESG分数分析。虽然一些定义与产生ESG分数的机构的方法一致,但其他定义则提出了进一步的问题。当使用ESG分数作为衡量标准时,需要谨慎。对一些人来说,它们代表财务调整后的风险回报,对另一些人来说,它们用来表示业务的可持续性。研究局限性/意义仅分析排名靠前的期刊。此外,仅使用关键术语“ESG Score”和“ESG Scores”来收集所有研究论文。实际意义研究人员可以通过开发与要测量的问题密切相关的具体方法来提高结果的准确性。构成ESG分数的潜在变量可以用来代替最终分数,以更准确地衡量环境或社会问题。原创性/价值这项研究表明,学者们使用ESG分数来代表ESG分数的官方方法并不总是包含的多个问题。ESG分数可以表达环境和社会问题的整体表现,但不能用于跟踪具体的潜在问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
8.30%
发文量
35
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信