IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/vision/v26y2022i2p163-171.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quantification of ESG Regulations: A Cross-Country Benchmarking Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Monica Singhania
  • Neha Saini

Abstract

Environmental, social and governance (ESG) criteria mean investment in economic choices which, without interference with the environment, are intended to promote long-term economic and social well-being. Due to high environmental and social awareness, customers expect companies to devote time and efforts to such sustainable practices. This attitude has led to an overall rise in ESG disclosures and reporting instruments globally with a focus on influence of ESG disclosures on financial performance of companies. Many European countries have already introduced mandatory disclosure of non-financial information. This transition from voluntary to mandatory motivated other countries to adopt mandatory ESG disclosure practices for sustainable development. The practice of reporting non-financial disclosures has been rising due to several reasons, such as increasing visibility, informing customers, avoiding the risk associated with firm performance and achieving sustainability. Countries in the early stages of ESG disclosure need to understand the benchmark practices used by countries with a well-developed ESG system. For preparing the ESG disclosure index and benchmarking based on disclosure score, this study considers a set of developed and developing countries with their ESG disclosures. On the basis of ESG disclosures, the countries have been classified into four different categories. We found Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, United Kingdom, Belgium and France, to have high ESG scores and have been classified as Countries with Well-Developed ESG Framework . Germany, Italy, USA, Australia, Switzerland, Canada, Japan, Brazil and South Africa have medium to high ESG scores and fall under the category Rapidly improving ESG framework . While Singapore, India, China, Philippines, Malaysia and Argentina are categorized as countries with ESG framework at developing stage , Russia, Indonesia, Thailand, Nigeria and Vietnam are classified as Countries with early-stage framework due to low ESG scores.

Suggested Citation

  • Monica Singhania & Neha Saini, 2022. "Quantification of ESG Regulations: A Cross-Country Benchmarking Analysis," Vision, , vol. 26(2), pages 163-171, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:vision:v:26:y:2022:i:2:p:163-171
    DOI: 10.1177/09722629211054173
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/09722629211054173
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/09722629211054173?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. Graafland, J.J. & Eijffinger, S.C.W. & Smid, H., 2004. "Benchmarking of corporate social responsibility: Methodological problems and robustness," MPRA Paper 20771, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Laurence Vigneau & Michael Humphreys & Jeremy Moon, 2015. "How Do Firms Comply with International Sustainability Standards? Processes and Consequences of Adopting the Global Reporting Initiative," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 131(2), pages 469-486, October.
    3. Ignacio J. Duran & Pablo Rodrigo, 2018. "Why Do Firms in Emerging Markets Report? A Stakeholder Theory Approach to Study the Determinants of Non-Financial Disclosure in Latin America," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-20, August.
    4. Priyanka Aggarwal, 2013. "Sustainability Reporting and its Impact on Corporate Financial Performance: A Literature Review," Indian Journal of Commerce and Management Studies, Educational Research Multimedia & Publications,India, vol. 4(3), pages 51-59, September.
    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. Nurul Jannah Mustafa Khan & Hasani Mohd Ali, 2023. "Regulations on Non-Financial Disclosure in Corporate Reporting: A Thematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-23, February.
    2. Luigi Lannutti, 0000. "The role of Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) regulations in attracting Foreign Direct Investment (FDI)," Proceedings of International Academic Conferences 14216212, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences.
    3. Lipeng Sun & Nur Ashikin Mohd Saat, 2023. "How Does Intelligent Manufacturing Affect the ESG Performance of Manufacturing Firms? Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-20, February.

    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. Isaac Monday Ikpor & Enrico Bracci & Clementina Iruka Kanu & Riccardo Ievoli & Benedette Okezie & Sunday Mlanga & Charles Ogbaekirigwe, 2022. "Drivers of Sustainability Accounting and Reporting in Emerging Economies: Evidence from Nigeria," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-19, March.
    2. R K Tailor & Ashoka M L & Parameshwara & Abhishek N, 2020. "Suitability of accounting education to current market," Indian Journal of Commerce and Management Studies, Educational Research Multimedia & Publications,India, vol. 11(2), pages 14-23, May.
    3. Richard Stiebal, 2023. "Use of SASB standards for ESG reporting in Europe: Empirical analysis [Empirická analýza použití SASB standardů pro ESG reporting v Evropě]," Český finanční a účetní časopis, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2023(1), pages 5-23.
    4. Adam Arian & John Sands & Stuart Tooley, 2023. "Industry and Stakeholder Impacts on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Financial Performance: Consumer vs. Industrial Sectors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-21, August.
    5. Yue Qi & Xiaolin Li, 2020. "On Imposing ESG Constraints of Portfolio Selection for Sustainable Investment and Comparing the Efficient Frontiers in the Weight Space," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(4), pages 21582440209, December.
    6. Graafland, J.J. & Kaptein, M. & Mazereeuw V/d Duijn Schouten, C., 2010. "Motives of Socially Responsible Business Conduct," Other publications TiSEM 3053983b-5552-408c-86a4-b, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    7. Marta Solórzano-García & Julio Navío-Marco & Luis Manuel Ruiz-Gómez, 2019. "Ambiguity in the Attribution of Social Impact: A Study of the Difficulties of Calculating Filter Coefficients in the SROI Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-19, January.
    8. Zanellato Gianluca, 2021. "Quality of Information Disclosed in Integrated Reports, in the Extracting Sector: Insights from Europe," Studia Universitatis Babeș-Bolyai Oeconomica, Sciendo, vol. 66(3), pages 1-20, December.
    9. Łukasz Matuszak & Ewa Różańska, 2019. "A Non-Linear and Disaggregated Approach to Studying the Impact of CSR on Accounting Profitability: Evidence from the Polish Banking Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-21, January.
    10. Rong Ma & Rakesh B. Sambharya, 2024. "International diversification and corporate social responsibility disclosure quality: Employee versus environmental dimensions," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(5), pages 4248-4264, September.
    11. Madeleine Feder & Barbara E. Weißenberger, 2019. "Understanding the behavioral gap: Why would managers (not) engage in CSR-related activities?," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 95-126, April.
    12. Saskia Crucke & Adelien Decramer, 2016. "The Development of a Measurement Instrument for the Organizational Performance of Social Enterprises," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-30, February.
    13. Dr. Michael Lutze, 2021. "Further Development of a New Concept in Small Scale Forestry: “Forest-Management-Service-Contracts†in Bavaria," International Journal of Management Science and Business Administration, Inovatus Services Ltd., vol. 7(3), pages 7-11, March.
    14. Rossana Mastrandrea & Rob ter Burg & Yuli Shan & Klaus Hubacek & Franco Ruzzenenti, 2022. "Scaling laws in global corporations as a benchmarking approach to assess environmental performance," Papers 2206.03148, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2023.
    15. Pisani, Niccolò & Kourula, Arno & Kolk, Ans & Meijer, Renske, 2017. "How global is international CSR research? Insights and recommendations from a systematic review," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 52(5), pages 591-614.
    16. Ven van de, B. & Graafland, J.J., 2006. "Strategic and moral motivation for corporate social responsibility," MPRA Paper 20278, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Francesco Gangi & Jérôme Méric & Rémi Jardat & Lucia Michela Daniele, 2019. "Business for society," Post-Print hal-02382307, HAL.
    18. 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.
    19. Michail Nerantzidis, 2018. "The role of weighting in corporate governance ratings," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 22(3), pages 589-628, September.
    20. Obey Dzomonda, 2022. "Environmental Sustainability Commitment and Access to Finance by Small and Medium Enterprises: The Role of Financial Performance and Corporate Governance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-20, July.

    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:sae:vision:v:26:y:2022:i:2:p:163-171. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.