← 論文一覧に戻る

任意のコミットメントから強制基準へ：ISSB時代におけるインドBRSRとEU CSRDの分析

<div> From Voluntary Commitments to Mandatory Standards: An Analysis of India's BRSR and the EU's CSRD in the Age of ISSB </div> <br> (原題)

Punit Bhura

Crossrefプレプリント2026-01-01#開示インフラ経営インパクト: 調達リスク対象セクター: cross_sector
DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.7303858
原典: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.7303858

🤖 gxceed AI 要約

日本語

本論文はESG開示がGRIベースの任意報告からISSB（IFRS S1/S2）の強制枠組みへ移行する過程を、インドのBRSRとEUのCSRDの比較を通じて分析する。BRR（2012）からBRSR（2021）、BRSR Core（2023）の49KPIと段階的保証義務への変遷をESRSと対比し、財務的マテリアリティ（インド）と二重マテリアリティ（EU）という哲学的相違を浮き彫りにする。環境・社会・ガバナンス指標の比較マトリクスを構築し、インドは気候リスクシナリオ分析、Scope 3、第三者保証に課題が残り、ISSBへの収斂と海外機関投資家への有用性が制約されると結論づける。

English

This paper traces ESG disclosure's shift from voluntary GRI reporting to the mandatory ISSB (IFRS S1/S2) architecture, comparing India's BRSR and the EU's CSRD. It maps BRSR's evolution from BRR (2012) to BRSR (2021) and BRSR Core (2023) with its 49 KPIs and phased assurance, against the EU's ESRS. It highlights a philosophical divide—India's financial materiality versus the EU's double materiality—and builds a comparative metrics matrix across environmental, social, and governance indicators, concluding that gaps in climate scenario analysis, Scope 3, and assurance limit BRSR's convergence with ISSB.

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

日本はSSBJ基準の確定と有報でのサステナビリティ開示義務化を控え、強制開示への移行設計を検討している。インドのBRSR Coreが示すKPI集約と段階的保証の導入は、日本がScope 3や保証範囲をどう設計するかを考える上で直接的な参照事例となる。財務マテリアリティと二重マテリアリティの対比は、SSBJがどちらの立場を採るかを巡る国内議論にも示唆を与える。

In the global GX context

As ISSB standards become the global baseline, this paper offers a rare structured comparison of how two major jurisdictions—India and the EU—institutionalized mandatory reporting under different materiality philosophies. It is directly useful for global disclosure scholarship on convergence, interoperability, and the practical limits of cross-border comparability for institutional investors.

👥 読者別の含意

🔬研究者:強制開示制度の収斂とマテリアリティ概念の相違を比較する枠組みとして活用できる。

🏢実務担当者:インド・EU双方で事業を持つ企業は、BRSR Coreの49KPIとESRSの要求を突き合わせ、開示・保証対応の優先順位を設計できる。

🏛政策担当者:強制開示への移行設計や段階的保証の導入、Scope 3義務化の是非を検討する際の国際比較の参考になる。

📄 Abstract（原文）

<div> This paper examines the evolution of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) disclosure from voluntary Global Reporting Initiative (GRI)-based reporting to the mandatory International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) architecture specifically International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) S1 and S2, comparing how India's Business Responsibility and Sustainability Report (BRSR) and the European Union's Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) have each institutionalized sustainability reporting within their respective governance structures.  </div> <div> <br> </div> <div> A core contribution is the detailed mapping of BRSR's transformation, from the Business Responsibility Report (BRR, 2012) through BRSR (2021) to BRSR Core (2023) with its 49 Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and phased assurance mandates, set against the EU's European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) under CSRD. The analysis surfaces a fundamental philosophical divergence: India's framework, regulated by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) and the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA), operates primarily on financial materiality, while the EU, governed by the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), European Commission (EC), and European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG), pursues double materiality, requiring disclosure of both financial risk and real-world environmental and social impact. The paper constructs a comparative ESG metrics matrix across environmental indicators, Scope 1, 2, and 3 greenhouse gas emissions, water intensity, and biodiversity impact, social indicators including workforce diversity, occupational safety, and supply-chain labour standards, and governance indicators covering board composition, anti-corruption disclosures, and executive remuneration linkages to ESG targets. Alignment with the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) and Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) frameworks is also assessed.  </div> <div> The paper concludes that while India has made significant strides, persistent gaps in climate-risk scenario analysis, Scope 3 reporting, and third-party assurance limit BRSR's convergence with ISSB and its utility for cross-border Foreign Institutional Investors (FIIs). </div>

🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース

🔔 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。