‘Looking for Something that Isn’t There’: A Case Study of an Early Attempt at ESG Integration in Investment Decision Making

References

• Abolafia, M. Y. (1998). Markets as cultures: An ethnographic approach. The Sociological Review, 46(S1), 69–85. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.1998.tb03470.x
   Google Scholar
• Adams, C. (2004). The ethical, social and environmental reporting-performance portrayal gap. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 17(I), 731–757. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570410567791
   Google Scholar
• Alvesson, M. (2003). Beyond neopositivists, romantics, and localists: A reflexive approach to interviews in organizational research. Academy of Management Review, 28(1), 13–33. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2003.8925191
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amel-Zadeh, A., & Serafeim, G. (2018). Why and how investors use ESG information: Evidence from a global survey. Financial Analysts Journal, 74(3), 87–103. https://doi.org/10.2469/faj.v74.n3.2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrew, J., & Cortese, C. (2013). Free market environmentalism and the neoliberal project: The case of the climate disclosure standards board. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 24(6), 397–409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2013.05.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Antonini, C., Beck, C., & Larrinaga, C. (2020). Subpolitics and sustainability reporting boundaries: The case of working conditions in global supply chains. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 33(7), 1535–1567. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-09-2019-4167
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Appadurai, A. (2011). The ghost in the financial machine. Public Culture, 23(3), 517–539. https://doi.org/10.1215/08992363-1336399
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arjaliès, D. L., & Bansal, P. (2018). Beyond numbers: How investment managers accommodate societal issues in financial decisions. Organization Studies, 39(5-6), 691–719. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840618765028
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barker, R., Hendry, J., Roberts, J., & Sanderson, P. (2012). Can company-fund manager meetings convey informational benefits? Exploring the rationalisation of equity investment decision making by UK fund managers. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 37(4), 207–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2012.02.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bebbington, J., & Larrinaga, C. (2014). Accounting and sustainable development: An exploration. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 39(6), 395–413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2014.01.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bebbington, J., Österblom, H., Crona, B., Jouffray, J. B., Larrinaga, C., Russell, S., & Scholtens, B. (2019). Accounting and accountability in the anthropocene. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 33(1), 152–177. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-11-2018-3745
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beck, U. (2007). World at risk. Polity.
   Google Scholar
• Berg, F., Koelbel, J. F., & Rigobon, R. (2020). Aggregate confusion: The divergence of ESG ratings, 1–64. https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3438533
   Google Scholar
• Boedker, C., & Chua, W. F. (2013). Accounting as an affective technology: A study of circulation, agency and entrancement. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 38(4), 245–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2013.05.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boedker, C., Mouritsen, J., & Guthrie, J. (2008). Enhanced business reporting: International trends and possible policy directions. Journal of Human Resources and Cost Accounting, 12(1), 14–25. https://doi.org/10.1108/14013380810872734
   Google Scholar
• Burchell, S., Clubb, C., Hopwood, A., Hughes, A., & Nahapiet, J. (1980). The roles of accounting in organizations and society. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 5(1), 5–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-3682(80)90017-3
   Google Scholar
• Busco, C., & Quattrone, P. (2015). Exploring how the balanced scorecard engages and unfolds: Articulating the visual power of accounting inscriptions. Contemporary Accounting Research, 32(3), 1236–1262. https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12105
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Busco, C., & Quattrone, P. (2018). In search of the ‘perfect one’: How accounting as a maieutic machine sustains inventions through generative ‘in-tensions’. Management Accounting Research, 39, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2017.02.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butler, J. (2015). Senses of the subject. Fordham University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Callon, M. (Ed.). (1998). The laws of the markets. Blackwell Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Callon, M., & Law, J. (2005). On qualculation, agency, and otherness. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 23(5), 717–733. https://doi.org/10.1068/d343t
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campbell, D., & Slack, R. (2011). Environmental disclosure and environmental risk: Sceptical attitudes of UK sell-side bank analysts. The British Accounting Review, 43(1), 54–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2010.11.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cappucci, M. (2018). The ESG integration paradox. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 30(2), 22–28. https://doi.org/10.1111/jacf.12296
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carbon Tracker Initiative. (2011). Unburnable carbon – are the world’s financial markets carrying a carbon bubble? Retrieved November 6, 2019, from https://www.carbontracker.org/reports/carbon-bubble/
   Google Scholar
• Carbon Tracker Initiative. (2018). Carbon budgets explained. Retrieved November 6, 2019, from https://www.carbontracker.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Carbon-Budgets_Eplained_02022018.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Chatterji, A. K., Durand, R., Levine, D. I., & Touboul, S. (2016). Do ratings of firms converge? Implications for managers, investors and strategy researchers. Strategic Management Journal, 37(8), 1597–1614. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2407
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chatterji, A., & Levine, D. (2006). Breaking down the wall of codes: Evaluating non-financial performance measurement. California Management Review, 48(2), 29–51. https://doi.org/10.2307/41166337
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chelli, M., & Gendron, Y. (2013). Sustainability ratings and the disciplinary power of the ideology of numbers. Journal of Business Ethics, 112(2), 187–203. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1252-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christensen, D., Serafeim, G., & Sikochi, A. (2021). Why is corporate virtue in the eye of the beholder? The case of ESG ratings. The Accounting Review, 1–53. https://doi.org/10.2308/TAR-2019-0506
   Google Scholar
• Christophers, B. (2019). Environmental beta or how institutional investors think about climate change and fossil fuel risk. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 109(3), 754–774. https://doi.org/10.1080/24694452.2018.1489213
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corvellec, H., Ek, R., Zapata, P., & Campos, M. (2018). Acting on distances: A topology of accounting inscriptions. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 67, 56–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2016.02.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coy, P. (2020). A sign the ESG movement is too big to ignore: there’s backlash’, Bloomberg, December 22nd. Retrieved April 17, 2021, from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-22/the-environmental-social-and-governance-esg-movement-is-facing-a-backlash
   Google Scholar
• Dambrin, C., & Robson, K. (2011). Tracing performance in the pharmaceutical industry: Ambivalence, opacity and the performativity of flawed measures. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 36(7), 428–455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2011.07.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Derrida, J. (2001). I have a taste for the secret. In G. Donis, & D. Webb (Eds.), A taste for the secret (pp. 1–92). Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Derwall, J., Koedijk, K., & Ter Horst, J. (2011). A tale of values-driven and profit-seeking social investors. Journal of Banking & Finance, 35(8), 2137–2147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2011.01.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dimson, E., Marsh, P., & Staunton, M. (2020). Divergent ESG ratings. The Journal of Portfolio Management, 47(1), 75–87. https://doi.org/10.3905/jpm.2020.1.175
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dorfleitner, G., Halbritter, G., & Nguyen, M. (2015). Measuring the level and risk of corporate responsibility: An empirical comparison of different ESG rating approaches. Journal of Asset Management, 16(7), 450–466. https://doi.org/10.1057/jam.2015.31
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drempetic, S., Klein, C., & Zwergel, B. (2019). The influence of firm size on the ESG score: Corporate sustainability ratings under review. Journal of Business Ethics, 167(2), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04164-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dubois, A., & Gadde, L. (2002). Systematic combining: An abductive approach to case research. Journal of Business Research, 55(7), 553–560. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(00)00195-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eccles, R. G., Lee, L. E., & Stroehle, J. C. (2020). The social origins of ESG: An analysis of innovest and KLD. Organization & Environment, 33(4), 575–596. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026619888994
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1989.4308385
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Espeland, W. N., & Stevens, M. L. (1998). Commensuration as a social process. Annual Review of Sociology, 24(1), 313–343. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.24.1.313
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Essen, A., Knudsen, M., & Alvesson, M. (2021). Explaining ignoring – working with information that nobody uses. Organization Studies, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840621998720
   Google Scholar
• EU Technical Expert Group on Sustainable Finance (EUTEGSF). (2020). Taxonomy: Final report of the technical expert group on sustainable finance, March. Retrieved April 17, 2021, from https://ec.europa.eu/info/business-economy-euro/banking-and-finance/sustainable-finance/eu-taxonomy-sustainable-activities_en
   Google Scholar
• Fourcade, M. (2011). Cents and sensibility: Economic valuation and the nature of “nature”. American Journal of Sociology, 116(6), 1721–1777. https://doi.org/10.1086/659640
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friede, G., Busch, T., & Bassen, A. (2015). ESG and financial performance: Aggregated evidence from more than 2000 empirical studies. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 5(4), 210–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/20430795.2015.1118917
   Google Scholar
• Global Sustainable Investment Alliance (GSIA). (2018). 2018 Global sustainable investment review. Retrieved November 14, 2019, from http://www.gsi-alliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/GSIR_Review2018.3.28.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Gond, J.-P., & Nyberg, D. (2016). Materializing power to recover corporate social responsibility. Organization Studies, 38(8), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840616677630
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gray, R. (1992). Accounting and environmentalism: An exploration of the challenge of gently accounting for accountability, transparency and sustainability. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17(5), 399–425. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-3682(92)90038-T
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gray, R. (2010). Is accounting for sustainability actually accounting for sustainability … and how would we know? An exploration of narratives of organizations and the planet. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 35(1), 47–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2009.04.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haigh, M., & Hazelton, J. (2004). Financial markets: A tool for social responsibility? Journal of Business Ethics, 52(1), 59–71. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BUSI.0000033107.22587.0b
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haigh, M., & Shapiro, M. (2011). Carbon reporting: Does it matter? Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 25(1), 105–125. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513571211191761
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harper Ho, V. (2010). Enlightened shareholder value: Corporate governance beyond the shareholder-stakeholder divide. Journal of Corporation Law, 36(1), 59–112.
   Google Scholar
• Hawley, J., & Williams, A. (2000). The emergence of universal owners: Some implications of institutional equity ownership. Challenge, 43(4), 43–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/05775132.2000.11472161
   Google Scholar
• Hawley, J., & Williams, A. (2007). Universal owners: Challenges and opportunities. Corporate Governance: an International Review, 15(3), 415–420. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8683.2007.00574.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hebb, T., Hawley, J., Hoepner, A., & Wood, D. (2015). The Routledge handbook of responsible investment. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Helm, D. (2015). Natural capital: Valuing the planet. Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hines, R. (1988). Financial accounting: In communicating reality we construct reality. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 13(3), 251–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-3682(88)90003-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hiss, S. (2013). The politics of the financialization of sustainability. Competition and Change, 17(3), 234–247. https://doi.org/10.1179/1024529413Z.00000000035
   Google Scholar
• Hopwood, A. (2007). Whither accounting research? The Accounting Review, 82(5), 1365–1373.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Humphrey, C., O'Dwyer, C., & Unerman, J. (2017). Re-theorizing the configuration of organizational fields: The IIRC and the pursuit of ‘enlightened’ corporate reporting. Accounting and Business Research, 47(1), 30–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2016.1198683
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). (2018). Special report on global warming of 1.5°C. Retrieved November 14, 2020, from https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/
   Google Scholar
• International Accounting Standards Board/International Financial Reporting Standards (IASB/IFRS). (2015). Conceptual framework for financial reporting - exposure draft, May. Retrieved May 8, 2019, from https://www.ifrs.org/content/dam/ifrs/project/conceptual-framework/exposure-draft/published-documents/ed-conceptual-framework.pdf
   Google Scholar
• International Energy Agency (IEA). (2021). Net Zero by 2050: A roadmap for the global energy sector, International Energy Authority, May. Retrieved June 16, 2021, from https://www.iea.org/reports/net-zero-by-2050
   Google Scholar
• International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). (2020). Consultation paper on sustainability reporting. IFRS Foundation: London. Retrieved January 23, 2021, from https://www.ifrs.org/projects/work-plan/sustainability-reporting
   Google Scholar
• International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC). (2013). The International < IR > Framework. Retrieved March 2, 2019, from http://integratedreporting.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/13-12-08-THE-INTERNATIONAL-IR-FRAMEWORK-2-1.pdf
   Google Scholar
• International Monetary Fund (IMF). (2019). Sustainable finance: Looking farther, Chapter 6, Global financial stability report, October. Retrieved June 1, 2020, from https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/GFSR/Issues/2019/10/01/global-financial-stability-report-october-2019#Chapter6
   Google Scholar
• Jameson, F. (1991). Postmodernism, or, the cultural logic of late capitalism. Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Jordan, S., & Messner, M. (2012). Enabling control and the problem of incomplete performance indicators. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 37(8), 544–564. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2012.08.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jordan, S., Mitterhofer, H., & Jørgensen, L. (2018). The interdiscursive appeal of risk matrices: Collective symbols, flexibility normalism and the interplay of ‘risk’ and ‘uncertainty’. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 67, 34–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2016.04.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knight, F. (1971). Risk, Uncertainty and Profit. 1921. Reprint. Chicago University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kreiner, K., & Mouritsen, J. (2005). The analytical interview. In S. Tengblad, R. Solli, & B. Czarniawska (Eds.), The Art of science (pp. 153–176). Göteborg University-School of Economics and Commercial Law/Gothenburg Research Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. (1986). Visualization and cognition: Thinking with eyes and hands. Knowledge and Society: Studies in the Sociology of Culture Past and Present, 6(6), 1–40. ISBN: 0-89232-664-6.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social; an introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Law, J. (2004). After method: Mess in social science research. Allen Lane.
   Google Scholar
• Lazonick, W., & O’Sullivan, M. (2000). Maximising shareholder value: A new ideology for corporate governance. Economy and Society, 29(1), 13–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/030851400360541
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, N., & Hassard, J. (1999). Organization unbound: Actor-network theory, research strategy and institutional flexibility. Organization, 6(3), 391–404. https://doi.org/10.1177/135050849963002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lehman, G. (1999). Disclosing new worlds: A role for social and environmental accounting and auditing. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 24(3), 217–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-3682(98)00044-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lehman, G. (2001). Reclaiming the public sphere: Problems and prospects for corporate social and environmental accounting. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 12(6), 713–733. https://doi.org/10.1006/cpac.2001.0476
   Google Scholar
• Leins, S. (2020). ‘Responsible investment’: ESG and the post-crisis ethical order. Economy and Society, 49(1), 71–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/03085147.2020.1702414
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lune, H., & Berg, B. L. (2017). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences. Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Mann, M. (2021). The new climate war: The fight to take back our planet. Public Affairs.
   Google Scholar
• Mikes, A. (2011). From counting risk to making risk count: Boundary-work in risk management. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 36(4-5), 226–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2011.03.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, P., & Power, M. (2013). Accounting, organizing and economizing: Connecting accounting research and organization theory. The Academy of Management Annals, 7(1), 557–605. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2013.783668
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Milne, M., & Chan, C. (1999). Narrative corporate social disclosures: How much of a difference do they make to investment decision making? The British Accounting Review, 31(4), 439–457. https://doi.org/10.1006/bare.1999.0108
   Google Scholar
• Milne, M., & Gray, R. (2013). W(h)ither ecology? The triple bottom line, the Global Reporting Initiative, and corporate sustainability reporting. Journal of Business Ethics, 118(1), 13–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1543-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murray, S. (2021, May 14). Measuring what matters: The scramble to set standards for sustainable business, Financial Times.
   Google Scholar
• Nobes, C. (2011). IFRS practices and the persistence of accounting system classification. Abacus, 47(3), 267–283. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6281.2011.00341.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Dwyer, B. (2011). The case of sustainability assurance: Constructing a new assurance service. Contemporary Accounting Research, 28(4), 1230–1266. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1911-3846.2011.01108.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Dwyer, B., Owen, D., & Unerman, J. (2011). Seeking legitimacy for new assurance forms: The case of assurance on sustainability reporting. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 36(1), 31–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2011.01.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parfit, C. (2020). ESG integration treats ethics as risk, but whose ethics and whose risks? Responsible investment in the context of precarity and risk-shifting. Critical Sociology, 46(4-5), 573–587. https://doi.org/10.1177/0896920519868794
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pixley, J. (2002). Finance organizations, decisions and emotions. The British Journal of Sociology, 53(1), 41–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071310120109320
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Power, M. (2009). The risk management of nothing. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 34(6-7), 849–855. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2009.06.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Power, M. (2010). Fair value accounting, financial economics and the transformation of reliability. Accounting and Business Research, 40(3), 197–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2010.9663394
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Power, M. (2018). Accounting, boundary-making and organisational permeability. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 57, 31–53. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0733-558X20180000057002
   Google Scholar
• Quattrone, P., & Hopper, T. (2005). A ‘time–space odyssey’: Management control systems in two multinational organisations. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 30(7-8), 735–764. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2003.10.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quattrone, P., Puyou, F., McLean, & Thrift, N. (Eds.), (2018) Imagining organizations: Performative imagery in business and beyond. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Rayner, S. (2012). Uncomfortable knowledge: The social construction of ignorance in science and environmental policy discourses. Economy and Society, 41(1), 107–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/03085147.2011.637335
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roberts, J. (2021). The boundary of the ‘economic’: Financial accounting, corporate ‘imaginaries’ and human sentience. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 76, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2020.102203
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roberts, J., & Jones, M. (2009). Accounting for self interest in the credit crisis. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 34(6-7), 856–867. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2009.03.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roberts, J., & Wang, T. (2019). Faithful representation as an ‘objective mirage’: A saussuean analysis of accounting and its participation in the financial crisis. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 65(102078), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2019.02.005
   Google Scholar
• Robson, K. (1992). Accounting numbers as ‘inscription’: Action at a distance and the development of accounting. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17(7), 685–708. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-3682(92)90019-O
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robson, K., & Bottausci, C. (2018). The sociology of translation and accounting inscriptions: Reflections on Latour and accounting research. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 54, 60–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2017.11.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scalet, S., & Kelly, T. F. (2010). CSR rating agencies: What is their global impact? Journal of Business Ethics, 94(1), 69–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0250-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sparkes, R. (2006). A historical perspective on the growth of socially responsible investment. In R. Sullivan, & C. Mackenzie (Eds.), Responsible investment (pp. 39–54). Greenleaf Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Sparkes, R., & Cowton, C. (2004). The maturing of socially responsible investment: A review of the developing link with corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 52(1), 45–57. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BUSI.0000033106.43260.99
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spence, C. (2007). Social and environmental reporting and hegemonic discourse. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 20(6), 855–882. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570710830272
   Google Scholar
• SustainAbility. (2020). Rate the Raters 2020: Investor survey and interview data. March. Retrieved November 14, 2020, from https://www.sustainability.com/thinking/rate-the-raters-2020/
   Google Scholar
• Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB). (2013). Conceptual framework of the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board. Retrieved June 1, 2020, from https://www.sasb.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/SASB-Conceptual-Framework-Final-Formatted-10-22-13.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosure (TCFD). (2017). Final report - recommendations of the task force on climate-related financial disclosures. Retrieved June 1, 2020, from https://www.fsb-tcfd.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/FINAL-2017-TCFD-Report-11052018.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Themsen, T., & Skaerbeck, P. (2018). The performativity of risk management frameworks and technologies: The translation of uncertainties into pure and impure risks. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 67, 20–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2018.01.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Unerman, G., Bebbington, J., & O’Dwyer, B. (2018). Corporate reporting and accounting for externalities. Accounting and Business Research, 48(5), 497–522. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2018.1470155
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Unerman, G., & Chapman, C. (2014). Academic contributions to enhancing accounting for sustainable development. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 39(6), 385–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2014.07.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• United Nations Environment Programme Finance Initiative and United Nations Principles for Responsible Investment (UNEPFI & UNPRI). (2011). Universal ownership: Why environmental externalities matter to institutional investors. Retrieved May 22, 2013, from https://www.unepfi.org/fileadmin/documents/universal_ownership_full.pdf
   Google Scholar
• United Nations-supported Principles for Responsible Investment (UNPRI). (2006). Principles for responsible investment. Retrieved May 22, 2013, from www.unpri.org/about/the-six-principles
   Google Scholar
• United Nations-supported Principles for Responsible Investment (UNPRI). (2020). An introduction to responsible investment. Retrieved February 18, 2021, from https://www.unpri.org/an-introduction-to-responsible-investment/what-is-responsible-investment/4780.article
   Google Scholar
• Vollmer, H. (2007). How to do more with numbers: Elementary stakes, framing, keying, and the three-dimensional character of numerical signs. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 32(6), 577–560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2006.10.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vosselman, E. (2014). The ‘performativity thesis’ and its critics: Towards a relational ontology of management accounting. Accounting and Business Research, 44(2), 181–203. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2013.856748
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whittington, G. (2008). Fair value and the conceptual framework project: An alternative view. Abacus, 44(2), 139–168. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6281.2008.00255.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Zhang, Y., & Andrew, J. (2014). Financialization and the conceptual framework. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 25(1), 17–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2012.11.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar