There is plenty to criticise about ESG. But variance in scores across providers is not one. The reason for the divergence is an outcome of different methodologies. Why would there be different methodologies? Because, unlike financial metrics which can be easily unpicked i.e., they are complicated, ESG data is complex. Contrary to the acronym the pillars are not silos they don't produce outcomes through their interaction and what they produce when they interact is not uniform. ESG is , therefore, not a solution. It's a data set! It's as the latter that ESG has the greatest potential impact. I am constantly surprised at how smart people can't see this.
There is plenty to criticise about ESG. But variance in scores across providers is not one. The reason for the divergence is an outcome of different methodologies. Why would there be different methodologies? Because, unlike financial metrics which can be easily unpicked i.e., they are complicated, ESG data is complex. Contrary to the acronym the pillars are not silos they don't produce outcomes through their interaction and what they produce when they interact is not uniform. ESG is , therefore, not a solution. It's a data set! It's as the latter that ESG has the greatest potential impact. I am constantly surprised at how smart people can't see this.
Very nice pawan