Abstract
AbstractESG criteria are becoming increasingly important for institutional and retail investors with a consequent growing demand of reliable and transparent ESG data to support their decisions. Several ESG rating agencies assess companies providing ratings and rankings. However, their rating methodologies are subject to some criticisms. One of the main weaknesses is the determination of the relative importance of the ESG criteria involved in the rating process. In this work, we propose the use of a MCDM rating and ranking approach with which the decision maker can rank firms based on their ESG global performance without the elicitation of aggregation weights. The approach, UW-TOPSIS, provides three outputs: the global ESG rating of the firms, a ranking based on the ratings and, for each alternative, a vector of weights describing the discriminatory power of the ESG criteria on the alternative, thus overcoming one of the criticisms to the methodologies of ESG rating agencies. However, UW-TOPSIS has a limitation as it does not provide a global vector of weights valid for all the alternatives in the ranking, expressing the overall role or contribution of each criteria to the componsition of the ranking. The acknowledge and analysis of this situation and the proposal of a solution, is the main objective of this paper.
Funder
Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades
Universidad de Oviedo
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Management Science and Operations Research,General Decision Sciences
Reference36 articles.
1. Acuña-Soto, C., Liern, V., & Pérez-Gladish, B. (2021). Normalization in TOPSIS-based approaches with data of different nature: Application to the ranking of mathematical videos. Annals of Operations Research, 296, 541–569. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-018-2945-5
2. Behzadian, M., Otaghsara, S. K., Yazdani, M., & Ignatius, J. (2012). A state-of the-art survey of TOPSIS applications. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(7), 13051–13069.
3. Benayoun, R., Roy, B., Sussman, B. (1996). ELECTRE: Une méthode pour guider le choix en présence de points de vue multiples. Note de travail 49, SEMA-METRA International, Direction Scientifique.
4. Benítez, R., & Liern, V. (2021). Unweighted TOPSIS: A new multi-criteria tool for sustainability analysis. The International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology, 28(1), 36–48.
5. Berg, F., Kölbel, J. F., & Rigobon, R. (2022). Aggregate confusion: The divergence of ESG ratings. Review of Finance, 26(6), 1315–1344.