IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/feemwp/338664.html

A Comparison between Sustainability Frameworks: an Integrated Reading through ESG Criteria for Business Strategies and Enterprise Risk Management

Author

Listed:
  • Casciotti, Paola

Abstract

Implementing the complex Agenda 2030, with its high global Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) requires, in the by now short time horizon of reference, an extraordinary effort, at all institutionals and private levels, to converge effectively on the whole system of intermediate and interrelated targets. At the same time, it is highly strategic to ensure macro and microeconomic financial long term balances among public and private sectors. The role of Sustainable Finance, in this context, is absolutely central. On the legislative side, the evolution of international directives, from Non Financial Reporting to Sustainability Reporting, impose to pay attention to new criteria and contents, also in order to distinguish deviant greenwashing phenomena. The paper compares the main frameworks, concerning the multiple and complex dimensions of Sustainability, like the institutional ones (MDG, SDG, BES) and one of the most widespread standard of non financial reporting framework (GRI) adopted by companies. The study aims to identify suitable criteria to allow the development of a simplified integrated analysis model of all targets and indicators established and currently in use, in order to converge effectively on the SDGs, to implement coherent public and enterprise’s policies and to produce realistic sustainability reports. The identified suitable criteria are the so called “ESG” criteria, increasingly recommended in the context of Sustainable Finance and by Supervisory bodies, as drivers in sustainability analyses, portfolio selection and rating determination. The paper, therefore, shows the results achieved by comparing these frameworks according to the proposed classification based on the individual E-S-G criteria and on their possible combinations (ES-EG-SG-ESG), through multidimensional matrixes of each goal, dimension, target and indicator (n.° 855) of the examined frameworks. The analysis quantifies the importance of environmental, social and governance drivers and the importance of their combination for each framework considered and also through them altogether. As mentioned in this paper, further analysis by the author leads to develop, according to this ESG simplified classification approach, a new enterprise internal framework, to integrate both sustainability and financial drivers, into Corporates strategic investment decision models and internal capital allocation (tangible and intangible) policies. In this way, the integration of sustainability criteria in all enterprises’ decision-making and risk management and control processes, becomes more effective and coherent with the Sustainable Development Goals. Consequently, the complex frameworks analysed, may become more easily comparable and integrated at an application enterprise level.

Suggested Citation

  • Casciotti, Paola, "undated". "A Comparison between Sustainability Frameworks: an Integrated Reading through ESG Criteria for Business Strategies and Enterprise Risk Management," FEEM Working Papers 338664, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:feemwp:338664
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.338664
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/338664/files/NDL2023-018.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.338664?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. Florian Berg & Julian F Kölbel & Roberto Rigobon, 2022. "Aggregate Confusion: The Divergence of ESG Ratings [Corporate social responsibility and firm risk: theory and empirical evidence]," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 26(6), pages 1315-1344.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Zixuan Zhang & Zhenyu Ge, 2024. "Fishing in muddy water? Climate policy uncertainty and corporate greenwashing in environmental, social, and governance," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 45(6), pages 4191-4207, September.
    2. McGee, Paraic & Sheenan, Lisa & Egan, Tom & O'Donohoe, Sheila, 2025. "Risk factor disclosure in green bond prospectuses and investor compensation," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    3. Abdelghafar M. Elhady & Samaa Shohieb, 2025. "AI-driven sustainable finance: computational tools, ESG metrics, and global implementation," Future Business Journal, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 1-30, December.
    4. Spira, Robin, 2024. "How does ESG rating disagreement influence analyst forecast dispersion?," Junior Management Science (JUMS), Junior Management Science e. V., vol. 9(3), pages 1769-1804.
    5. Azeem, Naveed & Ullah, Muhammad & Ullah, Farid, 2023. "Board gender diversity and firms' financial resilience during the Covid-19 pandemic," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 58(PA).
    6. Dutta, Sunil & Hwang, Jinsung & Patatoukas, Panos N., 2025. "Fundamentals of carbon emissions scaling: Implications for sector peer comparisons and carbon efficient indexing," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    7. van Weeren, Michelle & Bluntz, Clarence, 2025. "What makes a rating useable? Shifting epistemic practices in the ESG rating field," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    8. Scholz, Robert, 2023. "Unternehmensmitbestimmung und die sozialökologische Transformation: Zusammenhang zwischen Mitbestimmungsindex und ESG-Kriterien in börsennotierten Unternehmen," Mitbestimmungsreport 79, Hans-Böckler-Stiftung, Düsseldorf.
    9. Carlos Fernández-Méndez & Rubén Arrondo-García & Ana Rosa Fonseca-Díaz, 2025. "Sustainability practices, board’s gender diversity and quota regulations in European markets," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 19(10), pages 3177-3227, October.
    10. Fabrizio Ferriani & Marcello Pericoli, 2024. "ESG risks and corporate viability: insights from default probability term structure analysis," Questioni di Economia e Finanza (Occasional Papers) 892, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    11. Zhuang, Pengtao & He, Qing & Ju, Wangjing & Xia, Qin, 2025. "How do firms react to ESG news-based sentiment? A corporate risk-taking perspective," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    12. Alix Auzepy & Christina E. Bannier & Fabio Martin, 2023. "Are sustainability‐linked loans designed to effectively incentivize corporate sustainability? A framework for review," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 52(4), pages 643-675, December.
    13. Chen, Hua & Wang, Zhuang, 2025. "Does ESG rating disagreement affect management tone manipulation?," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    14. Rabab Abouarab & Tapas Mishra & Simon Wolfe, 2025. "Spotting Portfolio Greenwashing in Environmental Funds," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 197(4), pages 811-839, April.
    15. Andreas Dimmelmeier, 2024. "Expanding the politics of measurement in sustainable finance: Reconceptualizing environmental, social and governance information as infrastructure," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 42(5), pages 761-781, August.
    16. Leifhelm, Mathis & Klein, Christian & Scholz, Peter, 2025. "Sustainable yet similar: Challenging the performance and risk assumptions of sustainable market indices," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    17. Galletta, Simona & Goodell, John W. & Mazzù, Sebastiano & Paltrinieri, Andrea, 2025. "The impact of environmental disclosure and controversies on bank value," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 134.
    18. Schoonjans, Eline, 2024. "From diversity to sustainability: Environmental and social spillover effects of board gender quotas," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 314-331.
    19. Fredy Pokou & Jules Sadefo Kamdem & François Benhmad, 2024. "Empirical Performance of an ESG Assets Portfolio from US Market," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 64(3), pages 1569-1638, September.
    20. Richard Bofinger & Simon Cornée & Ariane Szafarz, 2024. "When in Rome, Do as the Romans Do: Disclosure Regulation and ESG Fund Management by Social and Conventional Banks," Working Papers CEB 24-003, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:feemwp:338664. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feemmit.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.