From sustainability to risk governance: visualizing the ESG–ERM overlap in the literature
サステナビリティからリスクガバナンスへ：ESGとERMの重複領域を文献から可視化する (AI 翻訳)
Viktorija Stasytytė, Sana Shahid
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本論文は、ESGリスクと企業リスク管理（ERM）の重複領域を体系的に可視化するため、Web of ScienceとScopusの文献を対象に探索的構造化文献レビューを実施。キーワードベースのテーママッピングにより、マテリアリティ、ガバナンス、リスク選好、統合プロセス、内部統制、ステークホルダー開示の6つの核心領域を特定し、ESGトピックをERM実務に結びつける概念マップを提示している。
English
This paper conducts an exploratory structured literature review of publications from Web of Science and Scopus to systematically visualize the overlap between ESG risks and enterprise risk management (ERM). Using keyword-based thematic mapping, it identifies six core convergence areas: materiality and value protection, governance and accountability, risk appetite and strategic decision-making, risk identification and integration, internal controls and monitoring, and stakeholder-oriented disclosure. The resulting conceptual map clarifies terminology and provides a practical translation logic linking ESG topics to ERM artifacts, supporting both follow-on empirical research and implementation.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
日本ではSSBJ基準の適用開始に伴い、ESG情報を内部統制やリスク管理体制と結びつける実務が急務となっている。本論文が提示するESG-ERM統合フレームワークは、統合報告書や有価証券報告書におけるリスク開示の質向上に直接活用可能な示唆を与える。
In the global GX context
With the ISSB standards and global convergence toward integrated risk and sustainability reporting, this paper offers a valuable mapping of how ESG risks can be embedded into enterprise risk management frameworks. It provides a practical taxonomy that supports the operationalization of double materiality and the alignment of sustainability disclosures with existing ERM architectures, which is particularly relevant for firms implementing TCFD or CSRD requirements.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Provides a systematic overview of the ESG-ERM literature and a conceptual framework for further empirical studies on risk integration.
🏢実務担当者:Offers a practical translation logic to embed ESG topics into ERM artefacts like risk taxonomies and control activities, aiding internal reporting and compliance.
🏛政策担当者:Highlights the need for regulatory guidance on integrating ESG risks into enterprise risk governance, supporting the operationalization of disclosure standards.
📄 Abstract（原文）
This paper aims to systematize and visualize where environmental, social, and governance (ESG) risks overlap with enterprise risk management (ERM) in the academic literature and to provide a compact framework for enterprise-wide risk governance. Although ESG risks are increasingly financially material, they are frequently addressed through sustainability reporting and compliance functions rather than embedded within ERM architectures, leaving the interface between the two domains fragmented and difficult to operationalize. To address this gap, we conduct an exploratory structured literature review of publications retrieved from the Web of Science and Scopus databases and apply descriptive keyword-based thematic mapping (illustrated using word-cloud visualizations) to identify dominant themes and recurring concepts linking ESG and ERM. The synthesis indicates that ESG and ERM converge around six core areas: (1) materiality and value protection; (2) governance and accountability; (3) risk appetite and strategic decision-making; (4) risk identification and integration within enterprise processes; (5) internal controls, assurance, monitoring, and internal reporting; and (6) stakeholder-oriented disclosure and transparency. The resulting conceptual map clarifies terminology and offers a practical translation logic for linking ESG topics to ERM artefacts such as risk taxonomies, ownership, control activities, and reporting routines, supporting follow-on empirical research and implementation.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- semanticscholar https://doi.org/10.3846/bm.2026.2520first seen 2026-07-26 06:10:22
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。