持続可能性時代におけるESG投資・経済的モラリティ・データ駆動型倫理
ESG investments, economic moralities, and data-driven ethics in the age of sustainability (原題)
A. Begim
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本論文は、持続可能な金融を支える三つの道徳概念——財務的重要性、『測定されるものは管理される』、二重の重要性——を「経済的モラリティ」として分析する。ノルウェーでの民族誌的調査に基づき、これらの論理が投資実務でどう実践されるかを検証し、データ駆動型倫理の限界を問う。倫理の金融化・定量化は持続可能性を金融に埋め込んだ一方、社会・環境の実質的変革の可能性を制約したと結論づける。
English
This article analyzes three moral concepts underpinning sustainable finance—financial materiality, 'what gets measured gets managed,' and double materiality—as forms of economic morality. Drawing on ethnographic research in Norway, it shows how these logics shape ESG practitioners' ethical responsibility and capital allocation, constituting a 'data-driven ethics.' It concludes that while quantifying ethics embedded sustainability in finance, it also constrained transformative potential.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
SSBJ基準や有報でのサステナビリティ開示が進む日本では、「財務的重要性」と「二重の重要性」の選択は制度設計の核心論点。本論文はEUの二重重要性アプローチを批判的に検討し、日本がどちらの道を選ぶべきか、またデータ定量化偏重の限界を考える上で示唆に富む。
In the global GX context
As ISSB/SSBJ and CSRD diverge on materiality, this paper interrogates the moral underpinnings of financial vs. double materiality, offering critical perspective on disclosure infrastructure debates. It cautions that quantification alone may not deliver the social and environmental transformation global frameworks promise.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:ESG・サステナブルファイナンスの倫理的基盤と定量化の限界を理論的に理解するための批判的視座を提供。
🏢実務担当者:自社のESG開示・評価が依拠する「重要性」概念の倫理的含意を再考し、データ偏重のリスクを認識する材料になる。
🏛政策担当者:二重の重要性を採用するEU規制の思想的背景と限界を理解し、日本版開示制度設計の参考にできる。
📄 Abstract（原文）
ABSTRACT This article examines three foundational moral concepts in sustainable finance – financial materiality, ‘what gets measured gets managed,’ and double materiality – as forms of economic morality (Yount and Leins, n.d., “Economic Moralities: Value Claims on the Future.” Journal of Cultural Economy). I argue that these concepts shape how ESG financial practitioners interpret ethical responsibility, define obligations to stakeholders, and determine how capital is allocated. Together, they constitute what I call ESG’s data-driven ethics: a moral logic in which responsibility is expressed through the collection, standardization, and quantification of non-financial data, and through its use in profit generation. The concepts of financial materiality and ‘what gets measured gets managed’ have aligned sustainable finance with the dominant morality of investment management – fiduciary duty – thereby facilitating its mainstreaming. The ‘double materiality’ concept, which underpins the European Union’s sustainability disclosure rules, by contrast, critiques this narrow focus on financial returns and seeks to incorporate companies’ social and environmental impacts alongside profit. Drawing on ethnographic research in Norway, I analyze how these moral logics are enacted in investment practice and interrogate the limits of data-driven ethics. I conclude that while the financialization and quantification of ethics have helped embed sustainability within finance, they have also constrained its potential to generate meaningful social and environmental transformation.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- semanticscholar https://doi.org/10.1080/17530350.2025.2599203first seen 2026-09-23 05:49:27 · last seen 2026-09-29 05:43:19
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。