Dmitry Anikin, Yulia Finogenova, Kristina Subbota, Aleksandra Ermakova


Objective: This article discusses the assessment model used to evaluate the ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) performance of companies. The purpose of this article is to present a new ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) rating methodology developed in accordance with the recommendations of the Bank of Russia and explain its benefits for sustainable investment in the context of the Russian market. Methods: The data structure, preprocessing, and scoring methodology have been elaborated. The scoring algorithm considers the intrinsic value of each criterion and evaluates the relative performance of a company within an industry. The methodology discussed here can provide a basis for investors to select companies based on ESG performance. Results: The authors accomplished several tasks in this study, including introducing the concept of ESG and discussing its importance, describing sources of data and criteria used to evaluate sustainable development, and developing a methodology for assessing ESG scores. They also discussed the benefits of this methodology for the Russian market and created a consolidated rating of companies based on ESG factors. Conclusion: The authors have developed a comprehensive and objective assessment model for evaluating the Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) factors of companies in Russia. The model's approach to data collection, preprocessing, and scoring provides investors with reliable and informative data for making responsible investment decisions.


ESG performance; Assessment model; Scoring methodology; Qualitative and quantitative data; Industry rank

Texto completo:

PDF (English)


Baracho, H. U., Pereira Da Cunha, B., & Dantas, T. B. (2018). Environmental Ethics and Challenges in Postmodernity: Social Responsibility, Business, Community, and the Environment. ESG Law Review, 1(ssue), e01600. https://doi.org/10.37497/esg.v1issue.1599

Bebbington, J., Unerman, J., & O’Dwyer, B. (2017). Sustainability accounting and accountability. Routledge.

Boraschi Machado , M. E., de Melo Conti, D., Castañeda Ayarza, J. A., & da Silva Filho, C. F. (2023). Enhancing Sustainability: Leveraging ESG Indicators to Evaluate Corporate Social Responsibility Policies in the Agribusiness Sector. Journal of Lifestyle and SDGs Review, 10(00), e01564. https://doi.org/10.19141/2237-3756.lifestyle.v10.n00.pe01564

Brammer, S., & Pavelin, S. (2006). Corporate reputation and social performance: The importance of fit. Journal of Management Studies, 43(3), 435-455.

Cheng, B., Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2021). The Impact of Corporate Sustainability on Organizational Processes and Performance. Management Science, 67(5), 2255- 2278.

Cristofolini, A. P. R., & Scatolin, C. L. (2021). Adequate regulation of ESG standards in Brazil: a comparative analysis with European regulation. ESG Law Review, 4(ssue), e01582. https://doi.org/10.37497/esg.v4issue.1586

Eccles, R. G., & Serafeim, G. (2018). The Performance Frontier: Innovating for a Sustainable Strategy. Harvard Business Review, 96(1), 50-60.

Eccles, R. G., Serafeim, G., & Krzus, M. P. (2019). Market interest in nonfinancial information. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 31(2), 33-42.

Fernández-Feijóo, B., Romero, S., &Ruiz-Blanco, S. (2014). Women on boards: Do they affect sustainability reporting? Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 21(6), 351-364.

Ferrero-Ferrero, I., Fernández-Izquierdo, M. Á., & Muñoz-Torres, M. J. (2021). The impact of ESG performance on stock price: Evidence from the COVID-19 crisis. FinanceResearchLetters, 40, 101738.

Flammer, C.; Kacperczyk, A. Corporate social responsibility as a defense against knowledge spillovers: Evidence from the inevitable disclosure doctrine. Strateg. Manag. J. 2019, 40, 1243–1267.

Florian B., Kölbel J. and Rigobon R. (2022). Aggregate Confusion: The Divergence of ESG Ratings. Review of Finance, May: 1–30.

Fornarelli, A., & Trotta, G. (2020). Environmental, social and governance performance and company financial performance: a literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 259, 120892.

Gillan, S. L., Koch, A., & Starks, L. T. (2021). Firms and social responsibility: A review of ESG and CSR research in corporate finance. Journal of Corporate Finance, 66, 101889.

Grewal, J. S., Jabbour, C. J., & de Sousa Jabbour, A. B. (2019). ESG and financial performance: Mapping the intellectual origins and theoretical foundations of the field. Business Strategy and the Environment, 28(8), 1559-1574.

Grewal, J., Lee, N., & Kim, J. (2021). The impact of third-party ESG rating on firm performance. Journal of Business Research, 134, 19-28.

Hoepner, A. G., & McMillan, D. G. (2020). ESG rating disagreement and stock returns: an empirical investigation. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 47(3-4), 369- 406.

Klettner, A., Clarke, T., & Boersma, M. (2018). The effectiveness of ESG rating agencies: a literature review. Journal of Business Ethics, 151(1), 111-133.

Kuosmanen T. and Post T. (2002). Quadratic Data Envelopment Analysis. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 53 (11): 1204–1214.

Linda-Eling L., Giese G. and Nagy Z. (2020). Combining E, S, and G Scores: An Exploration of Alternative Weighting Schemes. The Journal of Impact and ESG Investing. 1 (1): 94–103.

Lima, A. A., & Ribeiro, T. de L. S. (2023). Mapping Sustainable Development Goals Research in Social Sciences: A Bibliometric Analysis. Journal of Lifestyle and SDGs Review, 10(00), e01562. https://doi.org/10.19141/2237-3756.lifestyle.v10.n00.pe01562

Matos, Pedro, ESG and Responsible Institutional Investing Around the World: A Critical Review (August 7, 2020). CFA Institute Research Foundation Literature Reviews, May 2020, ISBN 978-1-944960-97-1.

Perego, P., Kennedy, S., & Whiteman, G. (2017). A lot of icing but little cake? Taking integrated reporting forward. Journal of Cleaner Production, 143, 942-950.

Ribeiro, R. P., Espuny, A. L. G., Hermes, A. B. M., & Andriolli , E. M. (2023). The Perception of Brazilians on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Low-Carbon Economy. Journal of Lifestyle and SDGs Review, 10(00), e01563. https://doi.org/10.19141/2237-3756.lifestyle.v10.n00.pe01563

Severo , E. A., Guimarães, J. C. F. D., & Silva Oliveira , N. Q. da. (2022). The Synergy of Sustainable Development Goals and Eco-Innovation: A Quantitative Study from the Brazilian Perspective. Journal of Lifestyle and SDGs Review, 9(00sdg), e01550. https://doi.org/10.19141/2237-3756.lifestyle.v9.n00sdg.pe01550

Schaltegger, S., & Wagner, M. (2011). Sustainable entrepreneurship and sustainability innovation: categories and interactions. Business Strategy and the Environment, 20(4), 222-237.

Scholtens, B., & Sievänen, R. (2019). Assessing the reliability of ESG data: a survey of ESG raters. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 9(2), 151-169.

Turkmen, N. C. (2022). Toward Sustainable Economic Growth: Aligning Macroeconomic Policies and Trade with SDG12. Journal of Lifestyle and SDGs Review, 9(00sdg), e01559. https://doi.org/10.19141/2237-3756.lifestyle.v9.n00sdg.pe01559

The Bank of Russia (2023). Model methodology of ESG ratings, Report for public consultations, 44.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21902/Revrima.v2i40.6365


  • Não há apontamentos.

Revista Relações Internacionais do Mundo Atual e-ISSN: 2316-2880

Rua Chile, 1678, Rebouças, Curitiba/PR (Brasil). CEP 80.220-181

Licença Creative Commons

Este obra está licenciado com uma Licença Creative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial 4.0 Internacional.