谁将是赢家:欧盟监管还是世界其他地区?-批评性评论

Ion Frecautan, A. Nita (Danila)
{"title":"谁将是赢家:欧盟监管还是世界其他地区?-批评性评论","authors":"Ion Frecautan, A. Nita (Danila)","doi":"10.47535/1991auoes31(2)011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper aims to explore the past and the present challenges of EU ESG regulatory framework. Moreover, it attempts to make an in-depth analysis of the major ESG frameworks and standards used at a global level: GRI, SASB, IIRC, CDP, CDSB, TCFD, CSRD, and EU Taxonomy. The analysis considers 5 criteria: framework vs. standard, shareholder perspective, reporting format, metrics, and materiality. In addition, we draw insights into the complexity of the EU ESG reporting scheme and its added value compared to already existing frameworks and standards. Our results have implications on three levels: 1) for reporting companies that are faced with the option of selecting a reporting framework that will minimize the cost of compliance but also help them implement their climate transition strategy; 2) for employees and consumers of goods and services provided by companies that incorporate ESG in their long term economic activities and 3) policymakers that want to make sure they design the best standards that will ensure a smoother and effective transition to a low carbon economy.","PeriodicalId":53245,"journal":{"name":"Annals of the University of Oradea Economic Science","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"WHO IS GOING TO WIN: THE EU ESG REGULATION OR THE REST OF THE WORLD? – A CRITICAL REVIEW\",\"authors\":\"Ion Frecautan, A. Nita (Danila)\",\"doi\":\"10.47535/1991auoes31(2)011\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper aims to explore the past and the present challenges of EU ESG regulatory framework. Moreover, it attempts to make an in-depth analysis of the major ESG frameworks and standards used at a global level: GRI, SASB, IIRC, CDP, CDSB, TCFD, CSRD, and EU Taxonomy. The analysis considers 5 criteria: framework vs. standard, shareholder perspective, reporting format, metrics, and materiality. In addition, we draw insights into the complexity of the EU ESG reporting scheme and its added value compared to already existing frameworks and standards. Our results have implications on three levels: 1) for reporting companies that are faced with the option of selecting a reporting framework that will minimize the cost of compliance but also help them implement their climate transition strategy; 2) for employees and consumers of goods and services provided by companies that incorporate ESG in their long term economic activities and 3) policymakers that want to make sure they design the best standards that will ensure a smoother and effective transition to a low carbon economy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53245,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of the University of Oradea Economic Science\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of the University of Oradea Economic Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.47535/1991auoes31(2)011\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of the University of Oradea Economic Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47535/1991auoes31(2)011","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文旨在探讨欧盟ESG监管框架的过去和现在的挑战。此外,它还试图深入分析全球范围内使用的主要ESG框架和标准:GRI, SASB, IIRC, CDP, CDSB, TCFD, CSRD和EU Taxonomy。该分析考虑了5个标准:框架与标准、股东视角、报告格式、指标和重要性。此外,我们还深入了解了欧盟ESG报告计划的复杂性及其与现有框架和标准相比的附加价值。我们的研究结果在三个层面上产生影响:1)对于面临选择报告框架的公司,该框架将最小化合规成本,同时也有助于他们实施气候转型战略;2)对于那些将ESG纳入其长期经济活动的公司所提供的商品和服务的员工和消费者,以及3)希望确保他们设计出最佳标准的政策制定者,以确保向低碳经济的平稳和有效过渡。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
WHO IS GOING TO WIN: THE EU ESG REGULATION OR THE REST OF THE WORLD? – A CRITICAL REVIEW
This paper aims to explore the past and the present challenges of EU ESG regulatory framework. Moreover, it attempts to make an in-depth analysis of the major ESG frameworks and standards used at a global level: GRI, SASB, IIRC, CDP, CDSB, TCFD, CSRD, and EU Taxonomy. The analysis considers 5 criteria: framework vs. standard, shareholder perspective, reporting format, metrics, and materiality. In addition, we draw insights into the complexity of the EU ESG reporting scheme and its added value compared to already existing frameworks and standards. Our results have implications on three levels: 1) for reporting companies that are faced with the option of selecting a reporting framework that will minimize the cost of compliance but also help them implement their climate transition strategy; 2) for employees and consumers of goods and services provided by companies that incorporate ESG in their long term economic activities and 3) policymakers that want to make sure they design the best standards that will ensure a smoother and effective transition to a low carbon economy.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
5 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