Greenwashing and Trust via Enhanced Self‐Regulation: The Case of <scp>ESG</scp> Rating Providers in Sustainable Finance
強化された自主規制によるグリーンウォッシングと信頼の構築：サステナブルファイナンスにおけるESG評価プロバイダーの事例 (AI 翻訳)
Agnieszka Smoleńska, David Levi‐Faur
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本稿は、EUと英国におけるESG格付プロバイダー規制の比較分析を通じて、多中心的ガバナンスにおける信頼構築・修復のための自主規制強化の役割を解明。規制機関と仲介者の関係に着目し、強制と自主規制の組み合わせが信頼に与える影響を明らかにした。
English
This paper compares ESG rating provider regulations in the EU and UK to examine trust-building and trust-repair in polycentric governance. It identifies varieties of enhanced self-regulation and shows how combinations of mandatory and voluntary rules shape trust in intermediaries.
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
日本でも金融庁がESG格付規制を検討中であり、EU・英国の比較分析は日本の制度設計に示唆を与える。特に自主規制と強制規制のバランスは、日本の有報・統合報告書との整合性を考える上で重要。
In the global GX context
As regulators globally develop ESG rating oversight, this comparative study of EU and UK approaches provides a framework for understanding trust dynamics and regulatory design choices relevant to ISSB, CSRD, and SEC climate disclosure rules.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Provides a comparative framework for analyzing trust and regulation in ESG rating governance.
🏛政策担当者:Offers insights into regulatory design choices for ESG rating providers, balancing mandatory and voluntary elements.
📄 Abstract（原文）
ABSTRACT Polycentric governance is a trust‐intensive and trust‐dependent governance that should actively seek to build and restore trust. The different ways in which this is done are poorly understood. Our study of the environmental, social, and governance (ESG) strategies and the green transition clarifies the role of enhanced self‐regulation and intermediaries in trust‐building and trust‐repair in polycentric governance. ESG rating providers as intermediaries may help to build and repair trust, but as with any trustee, they represent a trust challenge as well. This article addresses these issues and is organized around three major questions: First, what are the political dynamics around the adoption of the rules for ESG ratings providers in the EU and United Kingdom? Second, what are the differences between the trust‐building and the trust‐repair strategies deployed? Third, how do these differences reflect the different approaches to the trust challenges of regulation by and of intermediaries? We apply process tracing and a comparative analysis of the regulation of ESG rating providers to generate insights into the trust‐building and trust‐repair strategies of rule‐makers. Our analysis leads us to identify varieties of enhanced self‐regulation that are differentiated by the regulatory strategies adopted by the rule‐makers vis‐à‐vis regulatory intermediaries. We show how such efforts may combine different elements of mandatory and voluntary regulation, and we shed light on the differentiated conceptualizations and complexities of the function of trust in polycentric governance regimes as a whole.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openaire https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.70114first seen 2026-05-14 21:57:36
🔔 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。