IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/acctfi/v61y2021is1p1589-1623.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measurement concerns and agreement of environmental social governance ratings

Author

Listed:
  • Luluk Widyawati

Abstract

Measurement quality of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) rating is important, considering the increasing interest in socially responsible investment. This paper examines the measurement quality of four ESG ratings. Comprehensive analysis of the ratings, including its dimensionality, reliability, and validity suggests that they have significantly different measurement construct and measurement concerns, despite some commonalities. This study also presents a novel approach to examine the convergence of ESG ratings by assessing the level of agreement. The results of interrater reliability analysis suggest that while the agreement between ESG scores is low, there is evidence of a low to moderate agreement of ESG rankings.

Suggested Citation

  • Luluk Widyawati, 2021. "Measurement concerns and agreement of environmental social governance ratings," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 61(S1), pages 1589-1623, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:acctfi:v:61:y:2021:i:s1:p:1589-1623
    DOI: 10.1111/acfi.12638
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.12638
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/acfi.12638?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Steven Scalet & Thomas Kelly, 2010. "CSR Rating Agencies: What is Their Global Impact?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 94(1), pages 69-88, June.
    2. Noushi Rahman & Corinne Post, 2012. "Measurement Issues in Environmental Corporate Social Responsibility (ECSR): Toward a Transparent, Reliable, and Construct Valid Instrument," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 105(3), pages 307-319, February.
    3. Alexis Cellier & Pierre Chollet & Jean†François Gajewski, 2016. "Do Investors Trade around Social Rating Announcements?," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 22(3), pages 484-515, June.
    4. Rezaee, Zabihollah, 2016. "Business sustainability research: A theoretical and integrated perspective," Journal of Accounting Literature, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 48-64.
    5. Emma Avetisyan & Kai Hockerts, 2017. "The Consolidation of the ESG Rating Industry as an Enactment of Institutional Retrogression," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(3), pages 316-330, March.
    6. Luluk Widyawati, 2020. "A systematic literature review of socially responsible investment and environmental social governance metrics," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 619-637, February.
    7. Martin Hedesström & Ulrika Lundqvist & Anders Biel, 2011. "Investigating consistency of judgement across sustainability analyst organizations," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(2), pages 119-134, March/Apr.
    8. Magali Delmas & Vered Doctori Blass, 2010. "Measuring corporate environmental performance: the trade‐offs of sustainability ratings," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(4), pages 245-260, May.
    9. Aaron K. Chatterji & David I. Levine & Michael W. Toffel, 2009. "How Well Do Social Ratings Actually Measure Corporate Social Responsibility?," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(1), pages 125-169, March.
    10. Gunther Capelle-Blancard & Aurélien Petit, 2016. "The weighting of CSR dimensions: one size does not fit all," Post-Print hal-01297088, HAL.
    11. Ashish Arora & Michelle Gittelman & Sarah Kaplan & John Lynch & Will Mitchell & Nicolaj Siggelkow & Robert J. Carroll & David M. Primo & Brian K. Richter, 2016. "Using item response theory to improve measurement in strategic management research: An application to corporate social responsibility," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(1), pages 66-85, January.
    12. Van den Bossche, Filip & Rogge, Nicky & Devooght, Kurt & Van Puyenbroeck, Tom, 2010. "Robust Corporate Social Responsibility investment screening," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1159-1169, March.
    13. Alexis Cellier & Pierre Chollet & Jean-François Gajewski, 2016. "Do Investors Trade around Social Rating Announcements?," Post-Print hal-02009571, HAL.
    14. Gunther Capelle-Blancard & S. Monjon, 2012. "Trends in the literature on socially responsible investment: Looking for the keys under the lamppost," Post-Print hal-00733402, HAL.
    15. Avshalom Adam & Tal Shavit, 2008. "How Can a Ratings-based Method for Assessing Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Provide an Incentive to Firms Excluded from Socially Responsible Investment Indices to Invest in CSR?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 82(4), pages 899-905, November.
    16. repec:dau:papers:123456789/7349 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Emma Avetisyan & Kai Hockerts, 2017. "Consolidation of the ESG Rating Industry as an Enactment of Institutional Retrogression," Post-Print hal-01695693, HAL.
    18. Aaron K. Chatterji & Rodolphe Durand & David I. Levine & Samuel Touboul, 2016. "Do ratings of firms converge? Implications for managers, investors and strategy researchers," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(8), pages 1597-1614, August.
    19. Natalia Semenova & Lars Hassel, 2015. "On the Validity of Environmental Performance Metrics," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 132(2), pages 249-258, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Reon Matemane & Tankiso Moloi & Michael Adelowotan, 2022. "Appraising Executive Compensation ESG-Based Indicators Using Analytical Hierarchical Process and Delphi Techniques," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-19, October.
    2. Tan, Ruipeng & Pan, Lulu, 2023. "ESG rating disagreement, external attention and stock return: Evidence from China," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 231(C).
    3. Wang, Haijun & Jiao, Shuaipeng & Ge, Chen & Sun, Guanglin, 2024. "Corporate ESG rating divergence and excess stock returns," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    4. Céline LOUCHE & Guillaume DELAUTRE & Gabriela BALVEDI PIMENTEL, 2023. "Assessing companies' decent work practices: An analysis of ESG rating methodologies," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 162(1), pages 69-97, March.
    5. Xiaoyan Xu & Hong Zhao, 2024. "An Empirical Study on ESG Evaluation of Chinese Energy Enterprises Based on High-Quality Development Goals—A Case Study of Listed Company Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(15), pages 1-22, August.
    6. Caterina Lucarelli & Sabrina Severini, 2024. "Anatomy of the chimera: Environmental, Social, and Governance ratings beyond the myth," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(5), pages 4198-4217, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Olivier Boiral & David Talbot & Marie‐Christine Brotherton, 2020. "Measuring sustainability risks: A rational myth?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 2557-2571, September.
    2. Elena Escrig-Olmedo & María Ángeles Fernández-Izquierdo & Idoya Ferrero-Ferrero & Juana María Rivera-Lirio & María Jesús Muñoz-Torres, 2019. "Rating the Raters: Evaluating how ESG Rating Agencies Integrate Sustainability Principles," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-16, February.
    3. Luluk Widyawati, 2020. "A systematic literature review of socially responsible investment and environmental social governance metrics," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 619-637, February.
    4. Clementino, Ester & Perkins, Richard, 2020. "How do companies respond to environmental, social and governance (ESG) ratings? Evidence from Italy," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 103046, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. Hasmik V. Khachatryan, 2022. "Divergence of ESG Ratings: Foreign Regulatory Trends," Finansovyj žhurnal — Financial Journal, Financial Research Institute, Moscow 125375, Russia, issue 5, pages 89-104, October.
    6. Tao, Hu & Zhuang, Shan & Xue, Rui & Cao, Wei & Tian, Jinfang & Shan, Yuli, 2022. "Environmental Finance: An Interdisciplinary Review," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    7. Samuel Drempetic & Christian Klein & Bernhard Zwergel, 2020. "The Influence of Firm Size on the ESG Score: Corporate Sustainability Ratings Under Review," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 167(2), pages 333-360, November.
    8. Ester Clementino & Richard Perkins, 2021. "How Do Companies Respond to Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) ratings? Evidence from Italy," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 171(2), pages 379-397, June.
    9. Paolo Capelli & Federica Ielasi & Angeloantonio Russo, 2021. "Forecasting volatility by integrating financial risk with environmental, social, and governance risk," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(5), pages 1483-1495, September.
    10. Rzeznik, Aleksandra & Weiss-Hanley, Kathleen, 2021. "The Salience of ESG Ratings for Stock Pricing: Evidence From (Potentially) Confused Investors," CEPR Discussion Papers 16334, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    11. Moritz Immel & Britta Hachenberg & Florian Kiesel & Dirk Schiereck, 2021. "Green bonds: shades of green and brown," Journal of Asset Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 22(2), pages 96-109, March.
    12. Gallucci, Carmen & Santulli, Rosalia & Lagasio, Valentina, 2022. "The conceptualization of environmental, social and governance risks in portfolio studies A systematic literature review," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    13. Frederic Läger & Yassin Denis Bouzzine & Rainer Lueg, 2022. "The relationship between firm complexity and corporate social responsibility: International evidence from 2010–2019," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(3), pages 549-560, May.
    14. Alfonso Del Giudice & Silvia Rigamonti, 2020. "Does Audit Improve the Quality of ESG Scores? Evidence from Corporate Misconduct," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-16, July.
    15. Vincenzo Pacelli & Francesca Pampurini & Anna Grazia Quaranta, 2023. "Environmental, Social and Governance investing: Does rating matter?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(1), pages 30-41, January.
    16. Felipe Arias Fogliano de Souza Cunha & Erick Meira & Renato J. Orsato, 2021. "Sustainable finance and investment: Review and research agenda," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(8), pages 3821-3838, December.
    17. Gaurav Talan & Gagan Deep Sharma, 2019. "Doing Well by Doing Good: A Systematic Review and Research Agenda for Sustainable Investment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-16, January.
    18. Jian Zhou & Xiaodong Lei & Jianglong Yu, 2024. "ESG rating divergence and corporate green innovation," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(4), pages 2911-2930, May.
    19. María Jesús Muñoz‐Torres & María Ángeles Fernández‐Izquierdo & Juana M. Rivera‐Lirio & Elena Escrig‐Olmedo, 2019. "Can environmental, social, and governance rating agencies favor business models that promote a more sustainable development?," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(2), pages 439-452, March.
    20. Marzhan Beisenbina & Laura Fabregat‐Aibar & Maria‐Glòria Barberà‐Mariné & Maria‐Teresa Sorrosal‐Forradellas, 2023. "The burgeoning field of sustainable investment: Past, present and future," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(2), pages 649-667, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:acctfi:v:61:y:2021:i:s1:p:1589-1623. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaanzea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.