Stakeholder engagement in the development of sustainability standards: Evidence from EFRAG and ISSB comment letters
持続可能性基準開発におけるステークホルダー関与：EFRAGとISSBのコメントレター分析 (AI 翻訳)
Alessandro Sura, EMANUELE DI VENTURA
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本研究は、EFRAG（欧州）とISSB（国際）のサステナビリティ基準設定プロセスにおけるステークホルダー関与を、NLP（自然言語処理）を用いて比較分析した。コメントレターの感情分析とトピックモデリングの結果、EFRAGではバランスの取れた感情と広範なテーマが見られたのに対し、ISSBでは財務的マテリアリティと比較可能性が強調されていた。これは両基準設定主体の制度的指向の違いを反映している。基準間の相互運用性の議論に示唆を与える。
English
This study compares stakeholder engagement in EFRAG and ISSB sustainability standard-setting using NLP. Sentiment and topic analysis of comment letters reveals that EFRAG shows balanced sentiment and broader thematic focus, while ISSB emphasizes financial materiality and comparability. These differences reflect distinct institutional logics. The findings inform debates on interoperability between ESRS and IFRS S1/S2.
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
本稿のEFRAGとISSBの比較は、日本のSSBJが基準設定を行う上での示唆に富む。特に、マルチステークホルダー型と投資家志向型の違いが意見形成に与える影響は、SSBJの今後のパブリックコメント設計や国際基準との整合性検討に有用である。
In the global GX context
This study provides the first large-scale comparative evidence on stakeholder engagement in EFRAG and ISSB consultations, using NLP. The findings are directly relevant to the global debate on interoperability between the ESRS and IFRS S1/S2, and to understanding how institutional design influences standard-setting outcomes.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Researchers can use these insights to further explore the relationship between governance models and stakeholder discourse in standard-setting.
🏢実務担当者:Sustainability disclosure teams can understand how different standard-setters' orientations shape feedback expectations, aiding in preparation of comment letters.
🏛政策担当者:Regulators and standard-setters (e.g., SSBJ) can benefit from understanding how institutional design affects stakeholder engagement quality and outcomes.
📄 Abstract（原文）
Purpose: This study compares stakeholder engagement in the sustainability standard-setting processes conducted by the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG) and the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB). Drawing on stakeholder theory, lobbying theory, and institutional logics, the study examines how different governance models - multi-stakeholder versus investor-oriented-shape the language, tone, and thematic focus of comment letters submitted during public consultations. Methodology: We analyse all comment letters submitted in the EFRAG consultation on the ESRS and in the ISSB consultations on IFRS S1 and IFRS S2, using Natural Language Processing (NLP) techniques – including sentiment analysis and topic modelling – to identify linguistic and thematic patterns in stakeholder feedback. Findings: The analysis reveals distinct engagement dynamics across the two consultations. EFRAG submissions display a more balanced sentiment and broader thematic orientation, while ISSB feedback emphasises financial materiality and comparability. These differences are consistent with the contrasting institutional orientations of the two standard setters. Originality: This is the first large-scale comparative study of stakeholder engagement in EFRAG and ISSB consultations, integrating NLP techniques with established theoretical perspectives to show how institutional context shapes stakeholder discourse. Practical implications: The findings suggest that differences in institutional orientation influence the type of stakeholder input received during standard-setting processes. These insights are relevant to ongoing debates on interoperability between EFRAG and the ISSB, as understanding how institutional contexts shape stakeholder discourse may inform future coordination efforts.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.3280/fr202620909first seen 2026-06-29 05:01:51 · last seen 2026-06-29 05:02:00
🔔 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。