Open Access
THE DIVERGENCE OF ESG RATINGS: AN ANALYSIS OF ITALIAN LISTED COMPANIES
https://doi.org/10.1142/S2282717X21500067Cited by:32 (Source: Crossref)
Abstract
The increasing attention to sustainability issues in finance has brought a proliferation of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) metrics and rating providers that results in divergences among the ESG ratings. Based on a sample of Italian listed firms, this paper investigates these divergences through a framework that decomposes ESG ratings into a value and a weight component at the pillar (i.e. E, S, and G) and category (i.e. sub-pillar) levels. We find that weights divergence and social and governance indicators are the main drivers of rating divergences. The research contributes to develop a new tool for analyzing ESG divergences and provides a number of recommendations for researchers and practitioners, stressing the need to understand what is really measured by the ESG rating agencies and the need for standardization and transparency of ESG measurement to favor a more homogeneous set of indicators.
JEL: G20, G24, G28
References
- [2017] The consolidation of the ESG rating industry as an enactment of institutional retrogression, Business Strategy and the Environment 26, 316–330. Crossref, Google Scholar
- F. Berg, J. F. Koelbel & R. Rigobon (2020) Aggregate confusion: The divergence of ESG ratings, Working Paper No. 5822–19, MIT Sloan School of Management, Cambridge, MA. Google Scholar
- E. Bolognesi & A. Burchi (2021) Non-financial reporting regulation, sell-side financial analysts and the ESG disclosure premium, Working Paper. Google Scholar
- R. G. Brandon, P. Krueger & P. S. Schmidt (2019) ESG rating disagreement and stock returns, Research Paper No. 19–67, Swiss Finance Institute — Geneva, Geneva. Google Scholar
- [2016] Do investors trade around social rating announcements?, European Financial Management 22, 484–515. Crossref, Google Scholar
- [2009] How well do social ratings actually measure Corporate Social Responsibility?, Journal of Economic & Management Strategy 18, 125–169. Crossref, Google Scholar
- [2016] Do ratings of firms converge? Implications for managers, investors and strategy researchers, Strategic Management Journal 37, 1597–1614. Crossref, Google Scholar
- [2021] The impact of direct environmental, social, and governance reporting: Empirical evidence in European-listed companies in the agri-food sector, Business Strategy and the Environment 30, 1080–1093. Crossref, Google Scholar
- [2010] Measuring corporate environmental performance: The trade-offs of sustainability ratings, Business Strategy and Environment 19, 245–260. Crossref, Google Scholar
- A. Dimmelmeier (2020) Mergers and Acquisitions of ESG firms: Towards a new financial infrastructure?, Working Paper, SocArxiv, doi:10.31235/osf.io/jt2uk. Google Scholar
- [2015] Measuring the level and risk of corporate responsibility: An empirical comparison of different ESG rating approaches, Journal of Asset Management 16, 450–466. Crossref, Google Scholar
- R. G. Eccles & J. Stroehle (2018) Exploring social origins in the construction of ESG measures, Working Paper, SSRN Electronic Journal, doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3212685. Google Scholar
- [2014] Lights and shadows on sustainability rating scoring, Review of Management Science 8, 559–574. Google Scholar
- European Commission (2020) Study on sustainability-related ratings, data and research, ERM Report, Directorate-General for Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Markets Union, Brussels, doi:10.2874/14850. Google Scholar
- Global Sustainable Investment Alliance (GSIA) (2020) Global sustainable investment review 2020, Report. Available at: http://www.gsi-alliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/GSIR-2020.pdf (accessed 20 September 2021). Google Scholar
- [2011] Investigating consistency of judgment across sustainability analyst organizations, Sustainable Development 19, 119–134. Crossref, Google Scholar
- [2015] Effectiveness of the KLD social ratings as a measure of workforce diversity and corporate governance, Business & Society 54, 599–631. Crossref, Google Scholar
- A. Lanza, I. Faiella & E. Bernardini (2020) Mind the gap! Machine learning, ESG metrics and sustainable investment, Occasional Paper No. 561, Bank of Italy. Google Scholar
- F. Li & A. Polychronopoulos (2020) What a difference an ESG ratings provider makes!, Research Affiliates, January. Available at: https://www.researchaffiliates.com/documents/770-what-a-difference-an-esg-ratings-provider-makes.pdf (accessed 20 September 2021). Google Scholar
- C. Lopez, O. Contreras & J. Bendix (2020) ESG ratings: The road ahead, Report, Milken Institute, doi:10.2139/ssrn.3706440. Google Scholar
- [2006] Measurement of corporate social action: Discovering taxonomy in the Kinder Lydenburg Domini ratings data, Business & Society 45, 20–46. Crossref, Google Scholar
- [2017] Corporate social performance: A review of empirical research examining the corporation–society relationship using Kinder, Lydenberg, Domini social ratings data, Business & Society 56, 796–839. Crossref, Google Scholar
- [2019] Is green the new gold? Venture capital and green entrepreneurship, Small Business Economics 52, 929–950. Crossref, Google Scholar
- [2021] Green and socially responsible finance: Past, present, and future. In: Proceedings of the ADEIMF Summer Conference 2021 . Google Scholar
- [2015] On the validity of environmental performance metrics, Journal of Business Ethics 132, 249–258. Crossref, Google Scholar
- Truvalue Labs (2020) Truvalue Labs methodology: Scoring. Google Scholar
- [2021] Measurement concerns and agreement of environmental social governance ratings, Accounting & Finance 61, 1589–1623. Crossref, Google Scholar
- [2011] Assessing corporate sustainability through ratings: Challenges and their causes, Journal of Environmental Sustainability 1, 5. Crossref, Google Scholar
