M. Arena, G. Azzone, G. Piantoni, B. I. Tabarelli De Fatis, M. Wang
{"title":"ESG评级分歧与可持续发展报告：报告标准和鉴证实务的作用","authors":"M. Arena, G. Azzone, G. Piantoni, B. I. Tabarelli De Fatis, M. Wang","doi":"10.1002/csr.3241","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Though environmental, social, and governance (ESG) ratings have the common ambition of measuring companies' sustainability-related risks, their usefulness is undermined by the issue of disagreement among diverse ESG ratings. Among the determinants of ESG disagreement, this paper focuses on the input information used by rating agencies, with specific attention to public disclosures. In detail, the paper aims at understanding whether adopting sustainability standards and external assurance of sustainability reports affects ESG rating disagreement. Based on an analysis of STOXX 600 and S&P 500 companies, and considering leading ESG providers (Refinitiv, S&P, Sustainalytics, MSCI, and ISS), our results show that, whilst the adoption of reporting standards does not influence ESG rating disagreement, the adoption of assurance practices determines a reduction of this phenomenon. Based on these results, the paper discusses implications for regulators and investors and provides paths for future research.</p>","PeriodicalId":48334,"journal":{"name":"Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management","volume":"32 4","pages":"5446-5468"},"PeriodicalIF":8.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/csr.3241","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"ESG Rating Disagreement and Sustainability Reporting: The Role of Reporting Standards and Assurance Practices\",\"authors\":\"M. Arena, G. Azzone, G. Piantoni, B. I. Tabarelli De Fatis, M. Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/csr.3241\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Though environmental, social, and governance (ESG) ratings have the common ambition of measuring companies' sustainability-related risks, their usefulness is undermined by the issue of disagreement among diverse ESG ratings. Among the determinants of ESG disagreement, this paper focuses on the input information used by rating agencies, with specific attention to public disclosures. In detail, the paper aims at understanding whether adopting sustainability standards and external assurance of sustainability reports affects ESG rating disagreement. Based on an analysis of STOXX 600 and S&P 500 companies, and considering leading ESG providers (Refinitiv, S&P, Sustainalytics, MSCI, and ISS), our results show that, whilst the adoption of reporting standards does not influence ESG rating disagreement, the adoption of assurance practices determines a reduction of this phenomenon. Based on these results, the paper discusses implications for regulators and investors and provides paths for future research.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48334,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management\",\"volume\":\"32 4\",\"pages\":\"5446-5468\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/csr.3241\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/csr.3241\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/csr.3241","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
ESG Rating Disagreement and Sustainability Reporting: The Role of Reporting Standards and Assurance Practices
Though environmental, social, and governance (ESG) ratings have the common ambition of measuring companies' sustainability-related risks, their usefulness is undermined by the issue of disagreement among diverse ESG ratings. Among the determinants of ESG disagreement, this paper focuses on the input information used by rating agencies, with specific attention to public disclosures. In detail, the paper aims at understanding whether adopting sustainability standards and external assurance of sustainability reports affects ESG rating disagreement. Based on an analysis of STOXX 600 and S&P 500 companies, and considering leading ESG providers (Refinitiv, S&P, Sustainalytics, MSCI, and ISS), our results show that, whilst the adoption of reporting standards does not influence ESG rating disagreement, the adoption of assurance practices determines a reduction of this phenomenon. Based on these results, the paper discusses implications for regulators and investors and provides paths for future research.
期刊介绍：
Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management is a journal that publishes both theoretical and practical contributions related to the social and environmental responsibilities of businesses in the context of sustainable development. It covers a wide range of topics, including tools and practices associated with these responsibilities, case studies, and cross-country surveys of best practices. The journal aims to help organizations improve their performance and accountability in these areas.
The main focus of the journal is on research and practical advice for the development and assessment of social responsibility and environmental tools. It also features practical case studies and evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of different approaches to sustainability. The journal encourages the discussion and debate of sustainability issues and closely monitors the demands of various stakeholder groups. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management is a refereed journal, meaning that all contributions undergo a rigorous review process. It seeks high-quality contributions that appeal to a diverse audience from various disciplines.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
