When Markets Care: Discrimination in Pricing Biodiversity Risk
市場が気にするとき：生物多様性リスクの価格設定における差別 (AI 翻訳)
Rui Duan, Sadok El Ghoul, O. Guedhami, Samir Saadi
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本論文は、2018～2021年の39カ国2,070社のデータを用い、企業の生物多様性フットプリントと株主資本コストの関係を分析。Scope 1・2の直接的な影響は市場で価格に反映されるが、サプライチェーン上のScope 3の間接的な影響は無視されることを発見。市場規律の限界を示し、補完的な政策と開示枠組みの必要性を強調する。
English
This paper examines equity market pricing of corporate biodiversity risk using firm-level footprints from 2,070 firms across 39 countries (2018-2021). It finds that markets impose a pricing penalty for Scope 1 and 2 biodiversity impacts but ignore Scope 3 supply chain impacts, revealing limits of market discipline and the need for complementary policy and disclosure frameworks.
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
日本でもTNFD対応が進む中、本論文は市場がどのような生物多様性情報を価格に反映するかを示し、企業の開示戦略や投資家対応に示唆を与える。特にScope3の無視は、サプライチェーン全体での影響可視化の重要性を強調する。
In the global GX context
This paper contributes to the global GX context by empirically demonstrating how financial markets price biodiversity risk differently across scopes. It supports the emerging TNFD framework and highlights the gap in market-based discipline for supply chain impacts, informing disclosure and policy design.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Provides novel empirical evidence on market pricing of biodiversity risk, revealing scope-dependent discrimination that informs future research on market discipline and disclosure.
🏢実務担当者:Corporate sustainability teams can use findings to prioritize direct impact reduction over supply chain disclosure if market pressure is a key driver.
🏛政策担当者:Regulators should note that market mechanisms alone fail to price indirect biodiversity impacts, underscoring the need for mandatory disclosure and policy interventions.
📄 Abstract（原文）
Biodiversity loss is among the most pressing challenges confronting business and society and is becoming an increasingly relevant concern in international business as biodiversity and nature-related disclosure frameworks continue to emerge. This paper examines the equity market pricing of corporate biodiversity risk using firm-level biodiversity footprints and the implied cost of equity capital for 2,070 firms across 39 countries from 2018 to 2021. Consistent with our main predictions, we use disaggregated biodiversity measures to show that markets impose a clear and economically meaningful pricing penalty on firms with larger direct biodiversity impacts arising from their own operations and energy use (Scopes 1 and 2), while largely ignoring indirect impacts embedded in global supply chains (Scope 3), which account for most biodiversity loss. The effect is stronger for firms subject to greater market scrutiny, operating in biodiversity-intensive, nature-dependent, or highly competitive industries, and located in countries with weaker environmental protections and right-leaning political regimes. The results are robust to alternative size measures, ESG controls, alternative fixed-effects specifications, individual implied cost-of-equity estimates, and adjustments for analyst forecast bias. Overall, the findings show that financial markets discipline visible and attributable biodiversity damage but fail to internalize supply-chain impacts, pointing to limits of market-based discipline and the need for complementary policy and disclosure frameworks to address biodiversity loss. These insights have important implications for corporate managers, investors, and policymakers.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- semanticscholar https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.6148947first seen 2026-05-05 22:19:48
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。