Towards a better understanding of ESG ratings
Robert Stewart
Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 2025, vol. 15, issue 3, 624-643
Abstract:
ESG raters provide substantially different ratings for the same companies. But what do these ratings measure? Applying content analysis to the methodology documents of 13 different ESG raters, I analyze the definitions of ESG ratings to determine what is being measured and inspect the pillars used to frame ESG ratings to determine, conceptually, how these ESG ratings are operationalized. The results indicate that ESG raters define different performance outcomes and deconstruct ESG arbitrarily. Some raters define a risk exposure, some define a performance management outcome, and others conflate risk and performance management concepts. I propose a categorization to classify ESG ratings based on their definitions. I further show that raters delineate ESG arbitrarily, leading to further disagreement in the operationalization of ESG ratings. These results show that ESG ratings are not conceptually designed to be comparable. Users of ESG ratings must make selections based on appropriate selection criteria.
Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:
Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/20430795.2025.2479538 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
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:taf:jsustf:v:15:y:2025:i:3:p:624-643
Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/TSFI20
DOI: 10.1080/20430795.2025.2479538
Access Statistics for this article
Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment is currently edited by Dr Matthew Haigh
More articles in Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().