如何修正ESG报告

Q3 Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
Accounting Pub Date : 2021-07-27 DOI:10.2139/ssrn.3900146
R. Kaplan, K. Ramanna
{"title":"如何修正ESG报告","authors":"R. Kaplan, K. Ramanna","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3900146","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Investors, advocacy groups, academics, and the 200 CEOs of the US Business Roundtable have asked corporations to take on an added purpose beyond a narrow pursuit of shareholder value. In response, many companies now issue ESG (Environmental, Societal, and Governance) reports. These reports, however, are so broad in scope that they fail to address the unique measurement challenges within each of ESG’s constituent components. Moreover, the breadth of ESG reporting allows corporations to gloss‐over (implicit) moral tradeoffs when their actions improve one of the reported ESG metrics (such as GHG emissions from its truck fleet) but worsen performance for an unreported metric (indentured labor used to mine minerals for electric vehicles’ batteries). Many ESG reports selectively present only those non‐financial metrics favorable to them. We propose improvements in ESG reporting by focusing on dimensions where broad societal agreement already exists about the preferred outcomes from corporate actions, such as reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and avoiding use of indentured labor in supply chains. In particular, we introduce a new and comprehensive system, based on well‐established accounting practices, for reporting and transferring GHG emissions across corporate supply and distribution chains. This system eliminates the measurement problems in the current, widely used GHG‐reporting standard, especially the feature that requires multiple counting of the same corporate emission. The new approach generates ESG data that are relevant and reliable, enabling better disclosure, governance, and auditing of corporate ESG performance.","PeriodicalId":7317,"journal":{"name":"Accounting","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How to Fix ESG Reporting\",\"authors\":\"R. Kaplan, K. Ramanna\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3900146\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Investors, advocacy groups, academics, and the 200 CEOs of the US Business Roundtable have asked corporations to take on an added purpose beyond a narrow pursuit of shareholder value. In response, many companies now issue ESG (Environmental, Societal, and Governance) reports. These reports, however, are so broad in scope that they fail to address the unique measurement challenges within each of ESG’s constituent components. Moreover, the breadth of ESG reporting allows corporations to gloss‐over (implicit) moral tradeoffs when their actions improve one of the reported ESG metrics (such as GHG emissions from its truck fleet) but worsen performance for an unreported metric (indentured labor used to mine minerals for electric vehicles’ batteries). Many ESG reports selectively present only those non‐financial metrics favorable to them. We propose improvements in ESG reporting by focusing on dimensions where broad societal agreement already exists about the preferred outcomes from corporate actions, such as reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and avoiding use of indentured labor in supply chains. In particular, we introduce a new and comprehensive system, based on well‐established accounting practices, for reporting and transferring GHG emissions across corporate supply and distribution chains. This system eliminates the measurement problems in the current, widely used GHG‐reporting standard, especially the feature that requires multiple counting of the same corporate emission. The new approach generates ESG data that are relevant and reliable, enabling better disclosure, governance, and auditing of corporate ESG performance.\",\"PeriodicalId\":7317,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounting\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounting\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3900146\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounting","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3900146","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

投资者、倡导团体、学者和美国商业圆桌会议(US Business Roundtable)的200位首席执行官要求企业在狭隘地追求股东价值之外,承担更多的目标。作为回应,许多公司现在发布了ESG(环境、社会和治理)报告。然而,这些报告的范围太广,以至于它们无法解决ESG每个组成部分中独特的测量挑战。此外,ESG报告的广度允许公司掩盖(隐含的)道德权衡,当他们的行为改善了报告的ESG指标之一(如卡车车队的温室气体排放),但恶化了未报告的指标(用于开采电动汽车电池矿物的契约劳工)的表现。许多ESG报告选择性地只呈现那些对他们有利的非财务指标。我们建议改进ESG报告,将重点放在社会对企业行动的首选结果已经达成广泛共识的维度上,例如减少温室气体(GHG)排放和避免在供应链中使用契约劳工。特别是,我们在完善的会计实践的基础上引入了一个新的综合系统,用于在企业供应链和分销链中报告和转移温室气体排放。该系统消除了目前广泛使用的温室气体报告标准中的测量问题,特别是需要对同一公司的排放量进行多次计数的功能。新方法生成的ESG数据具有相关性和可靠性,有助于更好地披露、治理和审计企业ESG绩效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How to Fix ESG Reporting
Investors, advocacy groups, academics, and the 200 CEOs of the US Business Roundtable have asked corporations to take on an added purpose beyond a narrow pursuit of shareholder value. In response, many companies now issue ESG (Environmental, Societal, and Governance) reports. These reports, however, are so broad in scope that they fail to address the unique measurement challenges within each of ESG’s constituent components. Moreover, the breadth of ESG reporting allows corporations to gloss‐over (implicit) moral tradeoffs when their actions improve one of the reported ESG metrics (such as GHG emissions from its truck fleet) but worsen performance for an unreported metric (indentured labor used to mine minerals for electric vehicles’ batteries). Many ESG reports selectively present only those non‐financial metrics favorable to them. We propose improvements in ESG reporting by focusing on dimensions where broad societal agreement already exists about the preferred outcomes from corporate actions, such as reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and avoiding use of indentured labor in supply chains. In particular, we introduce a new and comprehensive system, based on well‐established accounting practices, for reporting and transferring GHG emissions across corporate supply and distribution chains. This system eliminates the measurement problems in the current, widely used GHG‐reporting standard, especially the feature that requires multiple counting of the same corporate emission. The new approach generates ESG data that are relevant and reliable, enabling better disclosure, governance, and auditing of corporate ESG performance.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Accounting
Accounting Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics-Pharmaceutical Science
自引率
0.00%
发文量
47
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
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