Understanding ESG Ratings: A Systematic Literature Review of Methodologies, Divergences, Impact, Standardization, Disclosure Quality, Technology, and Global Financial Implications (2020–2025)
ESG格付けの理解：方法論、乖離、影響、標準化、開示の質、テクノロジー、そしてグローバルな金融への影響に関する体系的文献レビュー（2020～2025年） (AI 翻訳)
Hannan Vilchis Zubizarreta, Delfor Tito Aquino
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
この論文は2020年から2025年までのESG格付けに関する学術研究を体系的にレビューしている。主な発見は、格付けの乖離、方法論の不透明性、格付けが企業成果に与える影響の多様性である。また、標準化の動きや新しい評価モデルについても議論している。
English
This systematic literature review synthesizes research from 2020-2025 on ESG ratings, focusing on methodologies, divergences, impact on firm outcomes, standardization, and global financial implications. Key findings include growing concerns about rating divergence, methodological opacity, and variable financial impacts. The review organizes the literature around methodological and evaluative debates.
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による開示基準が策定されつつあり、ESG格付けの乖離や方法論の不透明性は投資家・企業双方にとって重要な課題である。本レビューは、格付けの標準化や影響に関する最新の議論を整理しており、日本企業の開示対応や投資家との対話に示唆を与える。
In the global GX context
Globally, ESG rating divergence is a critical issue for investors and regulators, with ISSB and other bodies working on standardization. This review provides an up-to-date synthesis of academic debates on rating methodologies, impact, and disclosure quality, relevant to ongoing regulatory efforts like SEC climate rule and CSRD.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Provides a comprehensive synthesis of ESG rating literature, identifying key debates and gaps for future research.
🏢実務担当者:Helps corporate sustainability teams understand the landscape of ESG rating methodologies and their potential impact on firm outcomes.
🏛政策担当者:Highlights issues of rating divergence and methodological opacity, informing potential regulatory approaches to rating standardization.
📄 Abstract（原文）
Purpose: This paper aims to systematically synthesize academic research published between 2020 and 2025 that investigates environmental, social, and governance (ESG) ratings and scores, with a focus on their methodologies, comparative performance, and impact on firm outcomes. Design/methodology/approach: A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted using the Lens.org scholarly database. A structured title search retrieved 334 open access journal articles published between 2020 and May 2025 containing the terms “ESG Score”, “ESG Rating”, or “ESG Rater”. The PRISMA 2020 protocol guided the selection and screening process. Findings: The literature exhibits growing concern about the divergence among ESG ratings, the methodological opacity of rating providers, and the variable financial implications of ESG scores. Common themes include score disagreements, rating agency biases, and emerging models for standardizing ESG assessments. Originality: This review provides the most up-to-date synthesis of the ESG rating literature, focusing exclusively on articles explicitly addressing ESG ratings or scores in their titles. It contributes clarity to the fragmented ESG measurement space by organizing findings around key methodological and evaluative debates.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.3390/realestate3030009first seen 2026-07-18 06:09:09
🔔 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。