Greenwashing in ESG Practices of Business Entities: Concept Evolution, Detection Patterns, and Research Agenda
事業体のESG実践におけるグリーンウォッシング：概念の進化、検出パターン、研究課題 (AI 翻訳)
Sih Indri Yuniasari, L. Purwanti
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本稿はESGグリーンウォッシングに関する系統的文献レビューであり、概念の進化、検出手法、投資家信頼・企業価値・規制効果への影響を分析する。PRISMAに従い2020-2025年の35論文を分析し、6つのテーマクラスター、6つの検出方法、6つの研究ギャップを特定。インドネシアを中心とした新興市場向けの研究課題を提案。
English
This systematic literature review maps the conceptual evolution of greenwashing in ESG practices, identifies detection patterns, and analyzes impacts on investor trust, firm value, and regulatory effectiveness. Using PRISMA, 35 articles (2020-2025) are analyzed, revealing six thematic clusters, six detection methods, and six research gaps. A four-cluster research agenda prioritized for emerging markets, especially Indonesia, is proposed.
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、グリーンウォッシング防止が急務となっている。本レビューが示す検出パターンや格付け不一致の問題は、日本の有報・統合報告書における開示品質向上や保証制度設計に示唆を与える。また、新興市場の事例は日本企業の海外サプライチェーン管理にも参考となる。
In the global GX context
Globally, regulators (SEC, ESMA, IOSCO) are intensifying anti-greenwashing scrutiny. This review integrates fragmented evidence on detection methods and systemic causes (rating divergence, process bias, lack of assurance), which directly informs the TCFD/ISSB disclosure ecosystem and transition finance integrity. The focus on Indonesia adds an underrepresented emerging-market perspective to the predominantly Western literature.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Provides a consolidated taxonomy of greenwashing detection methods and a prioritized research agenda for emerging-market contexts, serving as a foundation for future empirical studies.
🏢実務担当者:Highlights systemic vulnerabilities in ESG ratings and disclosure processes, guiding corporate sustainability teams to strengthen internal controls and external assurance to avoid greenwashing allegations.
🏛政策担当者:Offers evidence on regulatory effectiveness and gaps, supporting the design of anti-greenwashing rules and mandatory assurance requirements for ESG disclosures.
📄 Abstract（原文）
This study presents a systematic literature review of greenwashing within Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) practices of business entities. The aim is to map the conceptual evolution of greenwashing in the ESG context, identify detection patterns used in empirical research, analyse the impact of ESG greenwashing on investor trust, firm value, and regulatory effectiveness, and formulate a future research agenda relevant to emerging-market contexts, particularly Indonesia. Following the PRISMA protocol, 35 articles published between 2020 and 2025 were retrieved from Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar and analysed using a multi-paradigm analytical framework that integrates functionalist and critical perspectives. The synthesis identifies six thematic clusters: detection and measurement of ESG greenwashing, divergence among ESG raters, governance and managerial behaviour, anti-greenwashing regulation, greenwashing in developing-country contexts, and financial and capital-market impacts. The review further maps six detection methods, identifies six research gaps, and proposes a four-cluster research agenda prioritised by urgency and contextual relevance to Indonesia. The findings indicate that ESG greenwashing is not merely an individual managerial deviation but a systemic consequence of structural vulnerabilities embedded in the ESG institutional architecture, including rating fragmentation, process-based measurement bias, and the absence of independent assurance mechanisms. Theoretical, methodological, and practical contributions are discussed, along with an integrative framework intended to guide future empirical research on corporate sustainability governance in emerging markets.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- semanticscholar https://doi.org/10.9734/ajeba/2026/v26i72321first seen 2026-07-16 06:10:21
🔔 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。