MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403296209 · doi:10.3390/jrfm17100460

ESG in Business Research: A Bibliometric Analysis

2024· article· en· W4403296209 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Evangelos Chytis, Nikolaos Eriotis, Maria Mitroulia

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEnvironmental Sustainability in Business
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessBibliometricsData scienceComputer scienceLibrary science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A company’s “value” is increasingly influenced by three criteria: the way it acts to protect the environment, its attitude towards society and the principles of corporate governance it has adopted. That is the Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) acronym, and it has substantial impact on company value. To further understand the ESG landscape in business research, this article aims to analyze the existing literature and present the current state of knowledge, main trends, and future perspectives. Through the Scopus database, the authors examine a sample of 1034 articles spanning from 2006 to 2022. VOSviewer and Biblioshiny packages are used for performance analysis and visualization of the publication trends, the conceptual structure of the field and the research collaborations. The results suggest that the publication and citation trends of ESG register an upward trend over time. In terms of research institutions, most of the influential ones emanate from the US, while a significant percentage of articles were published in top-tier financial journals. Science mapping via co-authorship analysis bifurcates the sample into six clusters and reveals the major themes and their evolution. Keyword analysis unfolds emerging trends that could be further explored. Given the breadth of the sustainability field and the ever-changing business environment, this paper is of great practical importance in motivating companies to engage in ESG activities. To the authors’ knowledge, no other study has attempted a comprehensive and detailed BA covering multiple aspects and dimensions of ESG in the corporate research field. The theoretical framework of this paper fills this gap and offers an in-depth synthesis of all published papers, providing invaluable insights to scholars, the business community and regulatory authorities, and creating alternative research paths for aspiring researchers.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesBibliometrics
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.447
Threshold uncertainty score0.912

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0990.186
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicEnvironmental Sustainability in BusinessFrench-language works237,207