Clean Technology (청정기술)

The Korean Society of Clean Technology (한국청정기술학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Research Trend on ESG Management of Corporation

기업의 ESG 경영에 대한 국내·외 연구동향

  • Byun, Youngjo (Department of Industry University Convergence, Hanbat National University) ;
  • Woo, Seung Han (Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering, Hanbat National University)
  • 변영조 (한밭대학교 산학융합학부) ;
  • 우승한 (한밭대학교 화학생명공학과)
  • Received : 2022.04.17
  • Accepted : 2022.05.17
  • Published : 2022.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The term environmental, social and governance (ESG) was first used in the 2003 United Nations Environmental Programme Finance Initiative (UNEP FI). Among the three areas of ESG, environment refers to the impact of companies on the environment. Environmental factors address climate change policies and attempts to reduce emissions, waste and natural resource consumption. Social factors refer to the direction in which a company can improve the social impact of stakeholder includes employees, customers, communities, and governments involved in direct or indirect interaction with the organization itself and the company. Governance factors refer to stakeholders who make major decisions, the composition of the board of directors, their diversity and independence, and the internal policies that set limits and expectations for decision-making. Research related to ESG management is part of corporate social responsibility, sustainability, corporate or financial performance, and social responsibility investment. Through case studies and data-based empirical studies, it was confirmed that ESG management companies had positive results for most of the ESG related fields. Through literature analysis of domestic and international ESG history, introduction background, and management performance, this paper presents theoretical, practical implications by confirming that ESG's introduction and operation strategies are strong competitive strategies that directly affect corporate growth by creating attractive factors.

ESG는 환경(environment), 사회(social), 지배구조(governance)의 영어단어 머리글자의 조어로 2003년 유엔 환경계획 금융이니셔티브(UNEP FI)에서 처음 사용되었다[1]. ESG의 세 가지 영역 중 환경은 기업이 환경에 미치는 영향을 말한다. 환경요인은 기후변화 정책과 배출, 폐기물 그리고 자연자원 소비의 감축 시도 등을 다룬다. 사회요인은 기업이 조직 자체 및 기업과 직간접적으로 상호작용하는 이해관계자-직원, 고객, 지역사회, 정부 등-간의 사회적 영향을 개선할 수 있는 방향을 이야기한다. 지배구조요인은 기업의 주요의사결정을 하는 주주, 이사회 구성과 이들의 다양성과 독립성, 그리고 의사결정에 대한 한계와 기대를 설정하는 내부정책 등을 말한다. ESG 경영과 관련된 연구는 기업의 사회적 책임, 지속가능성, 기업 또는 재무적 성과 그리고 사회적 책임투자 등에 대한 부분이며 사례연구, 데이터 기반의 실증연구를 통하여 ESG 경영기업은 전기한 분야 대부분에서 정(+)의 결과가 나왔음을 확인할 수 있었다. 본 논문은 ESG의 역사, 도입배경 그리고 경영성과에 미치는 영향 등을 국내·외 연구의 문헌분석을 통해 재무, 인사, 마케팅, 생산전략은 장기적으로 재무적인 요소뿐만 아니라 비재무적 요소 등에서도 ESG를 도입·운영하는 회사들이 강한 시장의 매력요인 창출을 통하여 기업의 지속가능성을 높이며 회사의 성장에 직접적인 영향을 주는 강력한 경쟁전략임 확인하여 이론적, 실무적 시사점을 제시하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. https://www.mk.co.kr/news/economy/view/2021/04/385785/ (accessed April. 2022).
  2. Lee, J. K., and Choi, J. I., Management, 8th ed., Beopmunsa, Korea, 1-534 (2019).
  3. https://npengage.com/companies/esg-history/ (accessed April. 2022).
  4. http://hri.co.kr/upload/publication/VIP200407_011_1.PDF (accessed April. 2022).
  5. Kwak, kwan Hoon, "CSR looking at that statement in the Going Concern and Corporate Law," Hanyang Law Review, 34, 155-177 (2011).
  6. https://www.unpri.org/sustainability-issues/environmentalsocial-and-governance-issues (accessed April. 2022).
  7. Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy, "Announcement of the 'K-ESG Guidelines' by related ministries to support ESG management of Korean companies," (2021).
  8. Farcane, Nicoleta and Bureana, Eusebiu, "History Of 'corporate Social Responsibility' Concept," Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica, 2, 31-48 (2015). https://doi.org/10.29302/oeconomica.2015.17.2.3
  9. Cho, Dae Hyoung, "ESG Global Current Status and Cases Studies," The Journal of Humanities and Social Science (HSS21), 12(3), 2651-2662 (2021).
  10. https://www.blackrock.com/ca/institutional/en/literature/whitepaper/viewpoint-exploring-esg-a-practitioners-perspective-june-2016.pdf (accessed April. 2022).
  11. Freeman, R., Harrison, J., and Zyglidopoulos, S., "Stakeholder Theory: Concepts and Strategies (Elements in Organization Theory)," Cambridge University Press, 1-74 (2018).
  12. Sunder, M. V., Lean six sigma project management - a stakeholder management perspective," The TQM Journal, 28(1), 132-150 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-09-2014-0070
  13. Mitchell, R. K., Bradley R. A., and Donna J. W., "Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the Principle of who and what really counts." The Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853-86 (1997). https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1997.9711022105
  14. Kitzmueller, M. and Shimshack, J., "Economic perspectives on corporate social responsibilities," Journal of Economic Literature, 50(1), 51-84 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.50.1.51
  15. Crifo, P. and Forget, V. D., "The economics of corporate social responsibility: A firm-level perspective survey," J. Econ. Surv., 29(1), 112-130 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12055
  16. https://accp.org/resources/csr-resources/accp-insightsblog/corporate-social-responsibility-brief-history/ (accessed April. 2022).
  17. Carroll, A. B., "The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders," Business Horizons, 4, 39-48 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1016/0007-6813(61)90056-8
  18. Porter, M. E. and Kramer, M. R., "The big idea: Creating shared value," Harv. Bus. Rev., 89(1/2), 62-77 (2011).
  19. Porter, M., Hills, G., Pfitzer, M., Patscheke, S., and Hawkins, E., "Measuring shared value: How to unlock value by linking social and business results," FSG. Creative Commons Attribution, 1-20 (2012).
  20. Hearst, M. A., Pedersen, E., Patil, L., Lee, E. Laskowski, P., and Franconeri, S., "An evaluation of semantically grouped word cloud designs," IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 26(9), 2748-2761 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1109/tvcg.2019.2904683
  21. DePaolo, C.A. and Wilkinson, K., "Get your head into the clouds: Using word clouds for analyzing qualitative assessment data," Tech Trends, 58, 38-44 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-014-0750-9
  22. Bernard Marr., "Key performance indicators (KPI): The 75 measures every manager needs to know," (Financial Times Series) 1st ed., Pearson, 1-344 (2011).
  23. Statman, Meir, "Socially responsible mutual funds," Financial Analysts Journal, 56. 30-39 (2000). https://doi.org/10.2469/faj.v56.n3.2358
  24. Benlemlih, M., Bitar, M., "Corporate social responsibility and investment efficiency," J. Bus. Ethics, 148, 647-671 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3020-2
  25. Gunnar Friede, Timo Busch and Alexander Basse, "ESG and financial performance: aggregated evidence from more than 2000 empirical studies," Journal of Sustainable Finance and Investment, 5(4), 210-233 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1080/20430795.2015.1118917
  26. Jang, S. W., and Kim, Y. H., "Corporate ESG and Long-Run Financial Performance," The Korean Journal of Financial Management, 30(1), 131-152 (2013).
  27. Kim, Y. M., and Park, J. H., "ESG·CSR and Corporate Financial Performance: What Have We Learned, and Where Do We Go from Here?," Journal of Strategic Management, 24(2), 75-114 (2021). https://doi.org/10.17786/JSM.2021.24.2.004
  28. Karl V. Lins, Henri Servaes and Ane Tamayo, "Social capital, trust, and firm performance: The value of corporate social responsibility during the financial crisis," The Journal of Finance, 72(4), 1787-1788 (2017).
  29. Jang Wooyoung, "A Critical Review of Institutional Investors' ESG Investing and Sustainability," Bus. Law Rev., 35(3), 39-73 (2021). https://doi.org/10.24886/BLR.2021.9.35.3.39
  30. Luca, F. A., Epuran, G., Ciobanu, C. I., and Horodnic, A. V., "Green jobs creation-main element in the implementation of bioeconomic mechanisms," Amfiteatru Econ., 21(50), 60-74 (2019).
  31. Rakic, B. and Rakic, M., "Holistic management of marketing sustainability in the process of sustainable development," Environ. Eng. Manag. J., 14(4), 887-900 (2015). https://doi.org/10.30638/eemj.2015.100
  32. Huh, J. H., Kim, T. M., Lee, S. R., and Lee, C. R., "The Relationship between ESG and Brand Equity : A Mixed Method Approach," Journal of Business Research, 37(1), 1-20 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-2963(95)00168-9
  33. Y. Trope and N. Liberman, "Construal-level Theory of Psychological Distance," Psychol. Rev., 117(2), 440-463 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018963
  34. Ji, Y. B., and Seo, Y. W., "The Effect of Domestic Corporations' ESG Activities on Purchase Intentions through Psychological Distance: Analysis of Differences by Product Involvement Level," The Journal of the Korea Contents Association, 21(12), 217-237 (2021). https://doi.org/10.5392/JKCA.2021.21.12.217
  35. Barrymore, Nathan, and Rachelle Sampson. "ESG Performance and Labor Productivity: Exploring whether and when ESG affects firm performance." Academy of Management Proceedings, (2021).
  36. Delmas, M. A., and Pekovic, S. "Environmental standards and labor productivity: Understanding the mechanisms that sustain sustainability," J. Organ. Behav., 34(2), 230-252 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1827
  37. Lannelongue, G., Gonzalez-Benito, J., and Quiroz, I., "Environmental management and labour productivity: The moderating role of capital intensity," J. Environ. Manage., 190, 158-169 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.11.051