Do ESG Ratings of Chinese Firms Converge or Diverge? A Comparative Analysis Based on Multiple Domestic and International Ratings

Yunfu Zhu, Haoling Yang and Ma Zhong ()
Additional contact information
Yunfu Zhu: College of Economics and Management, Nanjing Forestry University, No. 159 Longpan Road, Xuanwu District, Nanjing 210037, China
Haoling Yang: College of Economics and Management, Nanjing Forestry University, No. 159 Longpan Road, Xuanwu District, Nanjing 210037, China
Ma Zhong: College of Economics and Management, Nanjing Forestry University, No. 159 Longpan Road, Xuanwu District, Nanjing 210037, China

Sustainability, 2023, vol. 15, issue 16, 1-17

Abstract: Since the Chinese economy has transitioned to a sustainable model, the Chinese socially responsible investment (SRI) market has expanded rapidly, which has deeply stimulated the development of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) ratings for Chinese firms. Domestic agencies, such as SynTao, Rankins (RKS), Sino-Securities (SSII), and China Alliance of Social Value Investment (CASVI), and international agencies, such as Bloomberg, FTSE Russell (FTSE), and Morgan Stanley Capital International (MSCI), have launched their own ESG rating systems. These emerging ratings may provide users of information with more diverse references; however, if their results are too divergent, they may also confuse users. To what extent do these ESG rating results in the Chinese market converge or diverge? Aiming to answer this question, we used Hushen 300 index firms in 2019 as the initial sample, and selected 195 firms covered by the above seven ratings for the analysis. Firstly, by comparing the overlap in the top 100 lists of these sample firms, we found that the list overlap rate between each pair of ratings was between 66.36% and 82.35%; however, only 35% of the firms were listed in the top 100 of all seven ratings. Furthermore, the Pearson correlation analysis showed that the correlation coefficients between each pair of ratings ranged from 0.057 to 0.736, and the average was only 0.411. These results suggest a wide divergence in the ESG rating results for Chinese firms. We suggest that information users need to consider a more diverse and comprehensive perspective when utilizing these ratings.

Keywords: ESG ratings; emerging markets; rating divergence; corporate sustainability (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2023
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (5)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/16/12573/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/16/12573/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:16:p:12573-:d:1220288

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().