Gendered perspectives in European sustainability reporting standards feedback
欧州サステナビリティ報告基準のフィードバックにおけるジェンダー視点 (AI 翻訳)
Esther Ortiz-Martínez, Salvador Marín-Hernández, Erekle Pirveli
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本研究は、欧州サステナビリティ報告基準（ESRS）へのパブリックコメントにおいて、提出者の性別がコメントの内容や言語的特徴に影響を与えるかを調査した。276件のフィードバックを分析した結果、男性と女性の間で量的・質的な差異は見られず、規制プロセスの解釈中立性と手続的一貫性が確認された。この結果は、高度に標準化された規制文脈が個人の言語的変異を中和することを示している。
English
This study investigates whether the gender of feedback providers influences the content and linguistic patterns of submissions to the European Commission's consultation on the draft European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS). Analyzing 276 feedback documents, the study finds no statistically significant gender differences in any quantitative or qualitative dimension, supporting the interpretative neutrality and procedural coherence of the consultation process. The findings highlight how highly standardized regulatory contexts can neutralize individual linguistic variation.
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の基準策定が進む中、ESRSのような大規模なパブリックコメントにおける意見の偏りを検証した本知見は、日本の基準設定プロセスの透明性向上に示唆を与える。また、ジェンダー多様性と開示の質の関係性についての議論にも貢献する。
In the global GX context
This paper provides empirical evidence on gender neutrality in sustainability reporting standard-setting consultations, relevant to global bodies like ISSB and EFRAG. It demonstrates that technical regulatory contexts can suppress individual variation, informing the design of inclusive yet consistent public consultation processes. The findings also contribute to broader research on institutional discourse and gender in financial regulation.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Researchers studying gender and discourse in regulatory settings will find novel evidence that gender does not shape feedback in highly technical consultations.
🏛政策担当者:Policymakers at standard-setters (e.g., EFRAG, ISSB) can use this to validate the representativeness of their consultation processes.
📄 Abstract（原文）
This study aims to investigate whether the gender of feedback providers influences the quantitative characteristics and narrative content of submissions to the European Commission’s public consultation on the draft European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS). The objective is to assess if gender shapes linguistic patterns or disclosure tendencies. It also examines whether gender affects substantive positions within a highly technical and institutionalised regulatory environment. The analysis is based on 276 ESRS feedback documents submitted between June 2023 and July 2024. This study excluded files lacking sufficient information to infer respondent gender. Using a mixed-methods approach, this study combines frequency statistics, chi-square tests, logistic regression and lexical analysis with WordSmith Tools 9.0. This approach enables examination of structural linguistic features, co-occurrence networks and thematic patterns. Robustness tests address potential confounding factors such as country, organisation type and document length. Results show no statistically significant gender differences in any quantitative or qualitative dimension of the submissions. Men and women use similar vocabulary, sentence structures, collocations and thematic clusters. This reflects the strong discursive constraints of ESRS technical consultation. Concordance and clustering analyses reveal four stable semantic domains: regulatory/procedural, materiality-related, technical/environmental and organisational/social. The structure of these domains remains consistent across genders. This absence of divergence demonstrates a high level of institutional linguistic homogenisation among contributors. This study provides the first large-scale evidence on gender-related linguistic behaviour in EU sustainability reporting consultations. It shows that gender does not influence the nature or framing of ESRS feedback. This supports the interpretative neutrality and procedural coherence of public consultation processes. The findings also contribute to research on institutional discourse. They show that highly standardised regulatory contexts can neutralise individual linguistic variation.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- semanticscholar https://doi.org/10.1108/srj-10-2025-1043first seen 2026-05-15 18:17:37 · last seen 2026-06-15 05:26:53
🔔 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。