
doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3900146
Investors, advocacy groups, academics, and the 200 CEOs of the US Business Roundtable have asked corporations to take on an added purpose beyond a narrow pursuit of shareholder value. In response, many companies now issue ESG (Environmental, Societal, and Governance) reports. These reports, however, are so broad in scope that they fail to address the unique measurement challenges within each of ESG’s constituent components. Moreover, the breadth of ESG reporting allows corporations to gloss‐over (implicit) moral tradeoffs when their actions improve one of the reported ESG metrics (such as GHG emissions from its truck fleet) but worsen performance for an unreported metric (indentured labor used to mine minerals for electric vehicles’ batteries). Many ESG reports selectively present only those non‐financial metrics favorable to them. We propose improvements in ESG reporting by focusing on dimensions where broad societal agreement already exists about the preferred outcomes from corporate actions, such as reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and avoiding use of indentured labor in supply chains. In particular, we introduce a new and comprehensive system, based on well‐established accounting practices, for reporting and transferring GHG emissions across corporate supply and distribution chains. This system eliminates the measurement problems in the current, widely used GHG‐reporting standard, especially the feature that requires multiple counting of the same corporate emission. The new approach generates ESG data that are relevant and reliable, enabling better disclosure, governance, and auditing of corporate ESG performance.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 49 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
