hh.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Symbol or substance? Scrutinizing the ‘risk transparency premise’ in marketized sustainable finance: The case of TCFD reporting
Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm, Sweden.
Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm, Sweden; Mistra Center For Sustainable Markets (MISUM), Stockholm, Sweden.
Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm, Sweden.
Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm, Sweden; Mistra Center for Sustainable Markets (MISUM), Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-3808-3513
Show others and affiliations
2022 (English)In: Business Strategy and the Environment, ISSN 0964-4733, E-ISSN 1099-0836, Vol. 32, no 6, p. 3027-3052Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Contemporary forms of “marketized” sustainable finance rely on the production, dissemination, and consumption of financialized ESG risk information. In this paper, we scrutinize this “risk transparency premise” in context of the TCFD's climate risk reporting framework. Adopting the lens of institutional theory and a mixed methods approach, we pursue two interrelated aims. First, we examine to which extent the climate risk disclosures of TCFD “supporters” from the European financial sector adhere to the information requirements spelled out in the TCFD framework. Second, we seek to uncover the organization level impediments that underlie substantive implementation of the TCFD framework and, in turn, the production and dissemination of the required climate risk information. Based on our findings, we argue that TCFD/climate risk reporting is prone to become a ‘ceremonial’ practice and that, at least as of now, the ‘institutional myth’ of risk transparency might rather serve to safeguard the ideals of the market as opposed to facilitate transformative change towards a more environmentally sustainable economy. Our findings complement research that has problematized contemporary forms of marketized sustainable finance as well as literature on climate risk reporting and TCFD more specifically. © 2022 The Authors. Business Strategy and The Environment published by ERP Environment and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Oxford: John Wiley & Sons, 2022. Vol. 32, no 6, p. 3027-3052
Keywords [en]
climate risk reporting, compliance, decoupling, sustainable finance, TCFD
National Category
Business Administration
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hh:diva-49138DOI: 10.1002/bse.3285ISI: 000903039600001Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85145069548OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hh-49138DiVA, id: diva2:1724594
Note

Funding: The Mistra Center for Sustainable Markets (MISUM) and the Handelsbanken Jan Wallanders and Tom Hedelius Foundation.

Available from: 2023-01-09 Created: 2023-01-09 Last updated: 2023-11-28Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records

Strömsten, Torkel

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Reuter, MarekStrömsten, Torkel
By organisation
School of Information Technology
In the same journal
Business Strategy and the Environment
Business Administration

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 35 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf