Financial Pricing Mechanisms for Corporate Carbon Risks: Methodological Critique and Integration in Empirical Research Under Dual Carbon Goals
企業炭素リスクの金融価格設定メカニズム：デュアルカーボン目標下での実証研究の方法論的批判と統合 (AI 翻訳)
Ranran Zhang
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本論文は、中国のダブルカーボン目標（2030年カーボンピークアウト、2060年カーボンニュートラル）を背景に、企業の炭素リスクが金融資産価格に与える影響を実証する際の方法論的課題を体系的に検討する。データの信頼性低下、過度に単純化された政策前提、線形モデルの限界という3つの核心的問題を指摘し、ブロックチェーン等の新技術によるデータ透明性向上、非線形モデルの開発、地域間リスク監視メカニズムの構築を提案する。
English
This paper systematically examines methodological challenges in empirically pricing corporate carbon risk under China's dual carbon goals (2030 peak, 2060 neutrality). It identifies three core issues: poor data reliability (e.g., omitted Scope 3 emissions and ESG rating discrepancies), oversimplified policy assumptions from fragmented regional carbon markets, and limitations of linear pricing models. It proposes an integrated framework using blockchain, non-linear models, and cross-regional monitoring, offering insights for transition economies.
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
中国のダブルカーボン目標に基づく炭素リスク価格設定の課題は、日本のGX推進においても示唆に富む。特に、スコープ3排出の開示不足やESG評価のばらつきが企業価値評価に与える影響は、日本のSSBJ開示基準や有価証券報告書におけるカーボンリスク情報開示の実務に参考となる。カーボンリスクの価格反映メカニズムを理解することで、日本企業の投資家対応や統合報告書での情報開示の質向上に貢献する。
In the global GX context
This paper provides a methodological critique that resonates globally as carbon risk pricing becomes central to transition finance. While focused on China's dual carbon goals, its analysis of data reliability (Scope 3 omissions) and model limitations applies to all jurisdictions implementing TCFD/ISSB disclosure standards. The proposed integrated framework offers a pathway for improving carbon risk assessment in emerging and developed economies alike.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Provides a systematic critique of empirical carbon risk pricing methods and an integrated framework that can guide future research in transition economies.
🏢実務担当者:Highlights data quality issues (Scope 3, ESG discrepancies) and recommends blockchain and non-linear models to enhance carbon risk pricing for corporate disclosure teams.
🏛政策担当者:Underscores the need for cross-regional risk monitoring and improved carbon market design to avoid pricing anomalies, relevant for regulators overseeing carbon pricing mechanisms.
📄 Abstract（原文）
Against the backdrop of China’s “dual carbon” goals—peaking carbon emissions by 2030 and achieving carbon neutrality by 2060—corporate carbon risk has become a systemic factor influencing financial asset pricing. This review systematically examines the methodological challenges in empirically pricing carbon risk within this context, focusing on three core issues: poor data reliability, oversimplified policy assumptions, and the limitations of linear pricing models. Specifically, corporate selective disclosure—such as omitting Scope 3 emissions and exploiting ESG rating discrepancies—severely distorts emission data. Moreover, regional carbon market fragmentation and supply-chain spillover effects complicate policy impact assessments, while behavioral biases among investors lead to anomalous pricing outcomes such as the U-shaped premium paradox. To address these challenges, this paper proposes an integrated framework incorporating data, modeling, and policy dimensions. It recommends employing emerging technologies like blockchain to improve data transparency, developing non-linear models that capture policy shocks and investor behaviors, and establishing a cross-regional risk monitoring mechanism. The study concludes that carbon risk pricing embodies dynamic interactions among policy, technology, and behavioral factors, and provides methodological insights tailored to transition economies like China. Future research should focus on data ethics, model adaptability, and quantifying cognitive biases in green investing.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- semanticscholar https://doi.org/10.54097/em7fjm56first seen 2026-05-05 22:11:12
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。