The Dark Side of ESG Ratings: Future Challenges for Corporate Strategies
Yazarlar (3)
Prof. Dr. Aykut Arslan Pîrî Reis Üniversitesi, Türkiye
Prof. Dr. Serdar YENER Sinop Üniversitesi, Türkiye
Abdülkadir Akturan Pîrî Reis Üniversitesi, Türkiye
| Makale Türü |
Özgün Makale
(ESCI dergilerinde yayınlanan tam makale)
|
||
| Dergi Adı | Foresight and Sti Governance | ||
| Dergi ISSN | 2500-2597 Dergi Bilgileri (2025) | ||
| Makale Dili | İngilizce | Basım Tarihi | 09-2025 |
| Kabul Tarihi | – | Yayınlanma Tarihi | 15-08-2025 |
| Cilt / Sayı / Sayfa | 19 / 3 / 78–85 | DOI | 10.17323/fstig.2025.26712 |
| Makale Linki | https://foresight-journal.hse.ru/article/download/26712/23005 | ||
| UAK Araştırma Alanları |
Örgütsel Davranış
|
||
| Özet |
| This paper critically examines the methodological inconsistencies of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) ratings and their impact on financial decision-making. While ESG scores are intended to guide investors and policymakers toward responsible business practices, discrepancies in rating methodologies raise concerns about their reliability and strategic value. Using a conceptual and theoretical framework, this paper integrates perceptions from institutional theory, signaling theory, and the sociology of valuation to explore how ESG ratings shape corporate sustainability narratives. It also draws on empirical studies to demonstrate inconsistencies in ESG scores and their consequences for financial markets. The study identifies three primary flaws in ESG ratings: (1) Divergent methodologies lead to inconsistent scores across rating agencies; (2) Firms prioritize ESG disclosure over actual sustainability improvements, fostering gre-enwashing; and (3) The lack of transparency in ESG rating methodologies distorts investment signals, leading to mispricing risks and misaligned sustainability incentives. Additionally, the absence of strong social indicators within ESG frameworks may contribute to the ineffectiveness of these ratings in truly capturing corporate sustainability. This paper does not provide primary empirical analysis but synthesizes existing literature to propose a refined understanding of ESG ratings. It highlights the need for future research on regulatory standardization, AI-driven ESG assessments, and independent verification mecha-nisms. The findings suggest that investors should not rely solely on ESG ratings when making financial decisions. Instead, they should combine multiple sustainability metrics and qualitative assessments to avoid misleading investment choices. A lack of ESG rating standardization risks undermining public trust in sustainable finance and corporate responsibility efforts. Furthermore, the insufficient emphasis on social indicators within ESG ratings may hin-der their ability to promote genuine corporate accountabil-ity and social progress. This paper contributes to the growing critique of ESG rating methodologies by arguing that without regulatory in-tervention, ESG scores will continue to serve as unreliable indicators of corporate sustainability. |
| Anahtar Kelimeler |
| corporate governance | ESG Ratings | greenwashing | institutional theory | investment risk | signaling theory | standardizatiofinancial markets | sustainability metrics | sustainable finance |
BM Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma Amaçları
| Atıf Sayıları | |
| Web of Science | 4 |
| Scopus | 5 |