gxceed
← 論文一覧に戻る

ESG Data Gaps, Digital Readiness and Environmental Security: A Multiview LCSA Perspective from Bulgaria and Moldova

ESGデータギャップ、デジタル対応度、環境安全保障：ブルガリアとモルドバからのマルチビューLCSA視点 (AI 翻訳)

Krasteva-Hristova R, Diaconu L

Research Squareプレプリント2026-06-22#開示インフラ対象セクター: cross_sector
DOI: 10.20944/preprints202606.1537.v1
原典: https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202606.1537.v1

🤖 gxceed AI 要約

日本語

本研究は、ブルガリアとモルドバの36組織を対象に、ESGデータギャップとデジタル対応度をLCSAの多視点から分析。ESGデジタル対応度指数（ESG-DRI）とデータギャップマトリクス（DGM）を用いて、全体的なデジタル対応度は中程度（平均2.20）で、ブルガリアがモルドバより高く、金融機関が最も高いセクター別対応度を示した。DGMの結果、ESG情報は概ね利用可能だが、粒度の不足と監査可能性の低さが課題。CSRD/ESRS準拠の保証可能な報告には、データシステムと内部統制の強化が必要。

English

This study examines ESG data gaps and digital readiness from a multiview LCSA perspective, comparing Bulgaria and Moldova across 36 organizations. Using ESG-DRI and DGM instruments, it finds moderate overall readiness (mean score 2.20), with Bulgaria outperforming Moldova and financial institutions leading. ESG information is available but lacks granularity and auditability, highlighting the need for stronger data systems and controls to support CSRD/ESRS-aligned, assurance-ready reporting.

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

日本のSSBJ基準への対応が進む中、本論文が明らかにしたESGデータの粒度不足や監査可能性の課題は、日本企業にとっても重要な示唆を与える。特に、デジタル対応度の指標（ESG-DRI）は、日本の企業が自社の開示準備状況を評価する参考となる。

In the global GX context

This study offers empirical insights into ESG data gaps and digital readiness, directly relevant to the ongoing implementation of CSRD/ESRS in the EU and similar frameworks globally (e.g., ISSB). The comparative design highlights the importance of auditability and data granularity for assurance-ready reporting, a key challenge for companies worldwide.

👥 読者別の含意

🔬研究者:Provides a comparative framework (ESG-DRI, DGM) and empirical evidence on ESG data quality and digital readiness, useful for scholars studying sustainability disclosure infrastructure.

🏢実務担当者:Corporate sustainability teams can use the ESG-DRI and DGM as self-assessment tools to evaluate their data readiness and identify gaps in auditability and granularity for CSRD compliance.

🏛政策担当者:Regulators in emerging disclosure regimes (e.g., Japan's SSBJ, EU's CSRD) can note the findings on sectoral differences and the importance of digital infrastructure for assurance-quality reporting.

📄 Abstract（原文）

This study examines ESG data gaps, digital readiness and environmental-security relevance from a multiview Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) perspective, comparing Bulgaria as an EU member state and Moldova as an EU-aligned transition economy. Using publicly available sustainability reports, integrated reports, non-financial statements, ESG disclosures and public-sector documents, the study analyses a balanced sample of 36 organisations, equally distributed between the two countries and covering corporate, financial and public-sector entities. The methodology combines qualitative content analysis with semi-quantitative scoring through two instruments: the ESG Digital Readiness Index (ESG-DRI) and the Data Gap Matrix (DGM), covering 540 indicator-level observations. The results show a moderate overall level of ESG digital readiness, with a mean ESG-DRI score of 2.20. Bulgaria records stronger readiness than Moldova, while financial institutions show the highest sectoral readiness. The DGM results reveal that ESG information is generally available, but remains insufficiently granular and weakly auditable. Auditability is the weakest dimension, while LCSA relevance and environmental-security materiality are comparatively high. The findings suggest that ESG reporting in both countries is progressing toward more structured sustainability disclosure, but stronger data systems, internal controls, audit trails and life-cycle data integration are needed to support CSRD/ESRS-aligned, assurance-ready and environmental-security-oriented reporting.

🔗 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。