A novel ESG Materiality methodology combining criterion level and sector-based approaches.


Published: Apr 28, 2023
Keywords:
ESG ESG Investing ESG criteria sustainability ESG materiality performance measurement risk management corporate governance sustainable finance Workflow Management , Business process re-engineering (BPR) Typology Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) Decision-Making
Nikolaos Kakogiannis
Haris Doukas
Nikolaos Chrysanthopoulos
Filippos Dimitrios Mexis
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1226-4890
Konstantinos Stouris
Abstract

As the ESG principles are rapidly becoming critical in the decision-making process of investment undertaking, companies must deal with ESG reporting either to fulfil obligatory requirements according to EU legislation or, to stay competitive and in line with the investing trends. In the market, several ESG rating methodologies exist consisting of numerous criteria and indicators that companies must consider in their reporting. Nevertheless, neither all ESG rating frameworks consider the same criteria, nor do all criteria have the same materiality weighting when estimating the final ESG rating. Thus, the establishment of a standardized and normalized ESG criteria materiality framework is considered crucial. This will enable the fine-tuning and calibration of the ESG evaluation, with materiality values that reflect accordingly the significance of the most important criteria. In addition, this methodology will enhance the comparability of the results of the different companies’ evaluations while creating a harmonized framework. The present manuscript introduces an integrated methodology for the estimation of the ESG materiality factors putting emphasis on the most frequent criteria of the main economic sectors. The methodology analyses data from several sources, including academic papers and methodologies, companies’ reports and globally established rating frameworks. The proposed approach results in the estimation of the materiality values for each criterion of a specific ESG rating scorecard, as well as introduces an overview of the materiality issues for each economic sector.

Article Details
  • Section
  • Energy
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
R. Jebe, “The Convergence of Financial and ESG Materiality: Taking Sustainability Mainstream,” American Business Law Journal, vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 645–702, Sep. 2019, doi: 10.1111/ablj.12148.
S. Gopal, J. Pitts, K. Inampudi, Y. Xu, and G. Cook, “The Evolving Landscape of Big Data Analytics and ESG Materiality Mapping,” The Journal of Impact and ESG Invest-ing, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 77–100, Nov. 2021, doi: 10.3905/jesg.2021.1.034.
S. Wu, C. Shao, and J. Chen, “Approaches on the Screening Methods for Materiality in Sustainability Reporting,” Sustainability, vol. 10, no. 9, p. 3233, Sep. 2018, doi: 10.3390/su10093233.
J. Garst, A. Beanland, J. Tähtinen, J. Suijs, and K. Maas, “The reality of materiality : In-sights from real-world applications of ESG materiality assessments.” World Business Council for Sustainable Development, Jun. 28, 2021.
B. C. Olsen, K. Awuah-Offei, and D. Bumblauskas, “Setting materiality thresholds for ESG disclosures: A case study of U. S. mine safety disclosures,” Resources Policy, vol. 70, p. 101914, Mar. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.resourpol.2020.101914.
“ESG Industry Materiality Map - MSCI.” https://www.msci.com/our-solutions/esg-investing/esg-industry-materiality-map (accessed Aug. 02, 2022).
“Materiality Mapping: Providing Insights Into The Relative Materiality Of ESG Factors | S&P Global.” https://www.spglobal.com/esg/insights/materiality-mapping-providing-insights-into-the-relative-materiality-of-esg-factors (accessed Aug. 02, 2022).
J. W. Dash, “Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB),” in World Scientific Encyclopedia of Climate Change, World Scientific, 2021. doi: 10.1142/11526-vol2.
N. Madison and E. Schiehll, “The Effect of Financial Materiality on ESG Performance Assessment,” Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 7, p. 3652, Mar. 2021, doi: 10.3390/su13073652.
S&P Global, “The ESG Risk Atlas: Sector And Regional Rationales And Scores,” 2019. https://www.spglobal.com/en/research-insights/articles/the-esg-risk-atlas-sector-and-regional-rationales-and-scores (accessed Apr. 27, 2022).
M. S. Pagano, G. Sinclair, and T. Yang, “Understanding ESG ratings and ESG indexes,” in Research Handbook of Finance and Sustainability, Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 339–371. doi: 10.4337/9781786432636.00027.
G. Halkos and S. Nomikos, “Corporate social responsibility: Trends in global reporting initiative standards,” Econ Anal Policy, vol. 69, pp. 106–117, Mar. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.eap.2020.11.008.
“Materiality: Determining what matters most - Cisco Blogs.” https://blogs.cisco.com/csr/materiality-determining-what-matters-most (accessed Mar. 29, 2023).
“Materiality matrix | RS Group.” https://www.rsgroup.com/esg/our-approach/materiality-matrix (accessed Mar. 29, 2023).
“Our CSR principles: materiality matrix, stakeholder mapping and SDGs - Getlink.” https://www.getlinkgroup.com/en/our-commitments/csr/csr-principles/ (accessed Mar. 29, 2023).
J.-P. Berrut and L. N. Trefethen, “Barycentric Lagrange Interpolation,” SIAM Review, vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 501–517, Jan. 2004, doi: 10.1137/S0036144502417715.
W. Legrand and A. Matthew-Bolofinde, “ESG, SDGs, and Hospitality: Challenges and Opportunities in Activating Sustainability,” in Business in the 21st Century, Emerald Publishing Limited, 2022, pp. 25–39. doi: 10.1108/978-1-80382-787-220221003.
G. H. Ionescu, D. Firoiu, R. Pirvu, and R. D. Vilag, “The impact of ESG factors on market value of companies from travel and tourism industry,” Technological and Eco-nomic Development of Economy, vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 820–849, May 2019, doi: 10.3846/tede.2019.10294.
“Sustainable Finance | Bloomberg Professional Services.” https://www.bloomberg.com/professional/solution/sustainable-finance/ (accessed Mar. 29, 2023).
M. Rostoum, “The Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Ratings Industry: How can publicly traded companies improve their overall ESG scores?,” Diss. Barnard College. 2018.