炭素排出開示：理論的視座・企業実務・今後の研究方向に関する体系的文献レビュー
Carbon Emission Disclosure: A Systematic Literature Review Of Theoretical Perspectives, Corporate Practices, And Future Research Directions (原題)
(著者不明)
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
PRISMA 2020に沿い、2021〜2026年の査読論文37件を対象に炭素排出開示（CED）研究を統合した体系的レビュー。正当性理論が最も多用され、ステークホルダー理論・エージェンシー理論・シグナリング理論が続く。開示はコーポレートガバナンスや規制・投資家・サプライチェーンの圧力に規定され、透明性や持続可能な金融へのアクセスを高める一方、基準の不統一、Scope 3データ不足、高コスト、グリーンウォッシュが課題と整理する。
English
A PRISMA 2020 systematic review synthesizing 37 peer-reviewed studies (2021-2026) on Carbon Emission Disclosure. Legitimacy Theory dominates, followed by Stakeholder, Agency, and Signaling theories, framing disclosure as a strategic response to societal and stakeholder pressure. Governance, regulation, investors, and supply chains drive disclosure, which improves transparency, legitimacy, and access to sustainable finance, yet inconsistent standards, scarce Scope 3 data, high costs, and greenwashing persist.
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
SSBJ基準の導入や有報・統合報告書でのScope 3開示義務化が進む日本企業にとって、CED研究の理論的整理は開示戦略の根拠づけに有用。基準不統一やScope 3データ不足という課題は、まさに日本企業が直面する実務的論点と重なる。
In the global GX context
As ISSB/SSBJ standards push mandatory Scope 3 and climate disclosure globally, this review maps the theoretical and empirical landscape of carbon disclosure research. It highlights persistent gaps—standard fragmentation, Scope 3 data scarcity, greenwashing—that directly inform CSRD, SEC climate, and TCFD-aligned disclosure debates.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:CED研究の理論的系譜と実証的知見を俯瞰でき、今後の研究課題設定の出発点となる。
🏢実務担当者:開示が正当性・資金調達・サプライチェーン対応に与える影響を理解し、Scope 3や基準統一への備えを検討できる。
🏛政策担当者:開示基準の不統一やScope 3データ不足が企業の負担とグリーンウォッシュの温床になる点を制度設計に反映すべき。
📄 Abstract（原文）
Carbon Emission Disclosure (CED) has emerged as a crucial element of corporate sustainability reporting because of rising stakeholder demands for environmental principles, openness and responsibility. Despite the rapid growth of CED research, existing studies remain fragmented across theoretical perspectives and empirical contexts. This study aims to synthesize recent literature by identifying the dominant theoretical perspectives, explaining how these theories interpret corporate carbon disclosure practices, and examining the associated benefits, challenges, and barriers. A Systematic Literature Review (SLR) was conducted following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. The review analyzed 37 peer-reviewed journal articles indexed in the Scopus database and published between 2021 and 2026. The findings reveal that Legitimacy Theory is the most frequently adopted theoretical perspective, followed by Stakeholder Theory, Agency Theory, and Signaling Theory, indicating that carbon disclosure is primarily viewed as a strategic response to societal expectations and stakeholder pressures. The review further shows that carbon disclosure is influenced by corporate governance, organizational capabilities, regulatory requirements, investor expectations, and supply chain pressures. High-quality disclosure enhances transparency, organizational legitimacy, stakeholder trust, environmental performance, and access to sustainable finance. However, companies continue to face challenges related to inconsistent reporting standards, limited Scope 3 emissions data, high implementation costs, and greenwashing concerns. This review presents a thorough integration of recent CED research and suggests implications for forthcoming studies and corporate sustainability reporting.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- semanticscholar https://journals.inaba.ac.id/index.php/jai/article/download/890/439first seen 2026-09-12 05:18:47 · last seen 2026-09-22 04:55:35
🔔 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。