Supporting ESG project management research in a pluralistic context: insights from a systematic literature review

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:Researchers in ESG and project management can use the proposed research agenda to identify underexplored areas, especially the social dimension and context-specific factors.

🏢実務担当者:Corporate sustainability and project teams can apply the three-axis framework (field, evaluation, rating) to better integrate ESG into their project lifecycles.

🏛政策担当者:Policymakers can leverage the insights on ESG governance and rating inconsistencies to refine regulations, particularly for non-listed firms and social impact measurement.

This article aims to clarify the integration of environmental, social and governance (ESG) principles into project management by synthesizing 2 decades of ESG research. Despite rapid growth in the literature, findings remain fragmented and complex. Through a systematic literature review, we analyze the relevance of ESG governance, strategy and implementation, while applying institutional theory's regulative, normative and cultural-cognitive dimensions as a guiding framework. We identify knowledge gaps, highlight connections between ESG and project management, and assess the underexplored social (“S”) dimension. Our goal is to provide a structured understanding that supports more effective ESG integration at the project level. We conducted a systematic literature review using the Web of Science (WOS) Core Collection, a standard source for academic reviews. Author Keyword searches targeted ESG studies in business management, using “ESG,” “environmental, social, governance,” and “environmental, social and governance” as search strings. “Corporate social responsibility (CSR)” was excluded, as it lacks the governance pillar central to ESG. Clear inclusion and exclusion criteria ensured alignment with our research objectives while maximizing coverage. The search yielded 2,740 articles, from which 164 met the criteria for in-depth analysis, providing a robust evidence base to examine ESG integration within the context of project and management research. Our systematic literature review identifies 17 future research agendas for ESG integration in projects. We classify them using Qi et al.’s (2023) mind map – enhanced with Turner and Xue's (2018) concepts – originally developed for ESG in infrastructure projects. The framework comprises: (1) ESG project field (“doing the right project”), including agendas on ESG actors and industry/country contexts; (2) ESG evaluation system (“doing the project right”), covering conceptualization and theorization and (3) ESG rating (“promoting”), addressing metrics for ESG quantification and digitalization. This classification provides a structured roadmap to guide scholarly inquiry and practical advancements in ESG-oriented project management. Among the results, we also focus specifically on the relevance of the ESG dimensions for project management as previously identified by Müller et al. (2025) (i.e. ESG governance, ESG strategy, and ESG implementation), and the presence of the three pillars of institutional theory (regulative, normative and cultural-cognitive dimensions). We also examine the current state of scientific publication on the S of ESG, since this dimension is more difficult to define and measure than the dimensions “E” and “G.” Finally, we propose a future research agenda based on these findings. The findings provide actionable insights for project management scholars and policymakers concerned with ESG, as they help identify critical areas. This study has limitations, primarily linked to the systematic literature review approach. Using only the Web of Science database, while covering most peer-reviewed international journals, inevitably excluded publications outside its scope. Despite carefully crafted search strings, alternative keywords and cross-referencing, some relevant ESG studies were omitted. Our focus on nonaccounting and nonfinancial research in business and management further narrows the scope, aligning findings with business environment and ethics literature but distancing them from accounting and finance perspectives. Future research could address this gap by integrating both streams, enabling a more comprehensive understanding of ESG across disciplinary boundaries. This study offers managerial implications for company leaders, rating agencies and government officials. For leaders, it enhances awareness of diverse factors influencing ESG performance and reporting. Rating agencies should refine measurement systems, particularly for nonlisted firms, as variations in indicator weighting can yield inconsistent results; continuous review of datasets and indicators is essential. Government officials can use these insights to strengthen ESG regulations, especially by developing tools to assess the actual societal benefits of ESG practices. Our review also highlights a significant gap in understanding how social impact is generated, urging targeted efforts from both public and private stakeholders. This research advances conceptual clarity in the ESG field by defining key constructs essential for rigorous investigation. It offers a comprehensive overview of ESG performance, enabling the identification of theoretical gaps and the resolution of conflicting findings. Unlike much existing literature that addresses ESG from a single perspective, our work provides an integrated view of the ESG landscape. By introducing a structured research agenda based on a three-axis mind map, we guide scholars toward more coherent and targeted studies. This framework fosters theoretical advancement and supports the generation of new, interdisciplinary knowledge in ESG and its application to project management.

• semanticscholar https://doi.org/10.1108/ijmpb-08-2025-0316first seen 2026-05-05 21:54:21